Plaintiff Defies DOJ Demand to Drop Trump’s White House Ballroom Lawsuit After Assassination Attempt

The National Trust for Historic Preservation, plaintiff in the lawsuit opposing President Donald Trump’s $400 million White House ballroom project, has refused the Department of Justice’s demand to dismiss the case. This defiance comes in the wake of a shooting incident at the White House Correspondents' Dinner, from which Trump was evacuated.

The DOJ argued that the lawsuit endangers the President’s safety, citing the recent assassination attempt. However, the plaintiff’s attorney countered that the case poses no threat to Trump’s security and emphasized that Congressional approval is constitutionally required for the ballroom’s construction—a requirement that remains unmet.

Lawsuit Continues Despite DOJ’s Urgent Plea

Gregory Craig, representing The National Trust for Historic Preservation, firmly rejected the DOJ’s claim that the lawsuit jeopardizes President Trump’s life. In a letter to DOJ Assistant Attorney General Brett Shumate, Craig called the assertion “incorrect and irresponsible,” underscoring that the legal challenge does not compromise the President’s safety.

Craig further noted that the Constitution and federal law mandate Congressional authorization for any construction on White House grounds, which has not been granted for the ballroom project. He urged the DOJ to seek such authorization rather than press for dismissal of the lawsuit.

DOJ Cites White House Correspondents' Dinner Shooting as Catalyst

The DOJ’s demand to drop the lawsuit followed the arrest of alleged gunman Cole Tomas Allen after a shooting at the White House Correspondents' Dinner. Shumate described the lawsuit as putting the President, his family, and staff at “great risk,” urging the plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss the case in light of the “assassination attempt.”

This shooting occurred just nine days after a federal judge blocked the ballroom’s construction, citing the lack of Congressional approval. The DOJ has appealed the ruling, and a higher court temporarily lifted the injunction while expediting review of the case.

Supporters Rally Behind Trump’s Ballroom Proposal

President Trump and Republican lawmakers argue the proposed 90,000-square-foot ballroom would offer superior security compared to venues like the Washington Hilton Hotel, where the shooting took place. They emphasize the ballroom’s location within the White House compound, featuring reinforced windows and no hotel rooms above, as a critical security advantage.

• Rep. Mike Lawler called the ballroom “imperative for a lot of reasons.”
• House Speaker Mike Johnson accused Democrats of inciting violence and praised bipartisan support for the ballroom’s security benefits.
• Sen. Rick Scott dismissed opposition as “Trump Derangement Syndrome.”

Social media campaigns by Trump supporters have amplified calls for the ballroom’s construction, though some critics have baselessly claimed the shooting was staged to pressure approval.

Legal and Political Battle Ahead

The dispute highlights a complex intersection of national security, constitutional law, and political tensions. While the DOJ pushes for dismissal citing safety concerns, the plaintiff insists on adherence to legal procedures requiring Congressional consent.

As the courts expedite review and political voices intensify, the fate of the White House ballroom remains uncertain. The outcome will set a precedent on executive authority and legislative oversight regarding construction on federal grounds.