They approved the project this week, long after construction started and after the judge issued this ruling. Hopefully that's the end of it and it moves forward.

My political beliefs are that everyone should be held to the same high standard regardless of party and things presidents do should be judged on the individual merits of the action. That's a tough ask in a polarized climate.

People who criticize everything Trump does as an instinctual response without putting a lot of critical thinking into it are being ridiculous. The fact that some people think everything he does is automatically bad and illegal to the point they scream to the heavens is quite sad.

People who defend everything Trump does as an instinctual response are equally ridiculous. The fact that some people think that everything he does is automatically good and above board to the point they scream to the heavens is equally sad.

knoxtom said:

---

Almost every "liberal" I know thinks the ballroom is a good idea. Currently receptions are done in tents, which are an insane cost since security has to be re-done every time. A permanent structure is a great idea.

"Liberals" are objecting for two reasons...

First, he shouldn't have torn down the existing structure without consulting the historical society. This isn't Trump's ballroom, it is America's ballroom and Trump won't be president forever.

Second, Trump does think and has always thought that rules don't apply to him. He is an ends justify the means guy, and unfortunately he believes that his opinion and only his opinion is the "ends." I believe that the ballroom idea would have been approved by Congress and the project would have happened. But by ignoring the procedure and taking private donations Trump now will pay those donations back tenfold with federal funds, pardons, and ending investigations... just like he always does. That is why there is a process for doing stuff like this and why private donations are bad. In Trump's world, Trump now owes those donors.

The White house is America's house. It wasn't his to tear down. It was America's choice to tear it down.

---

Oh horse*****

There's no way you're getting 7 Democrats in the Senate to give Trump ANYTHING...

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

---

FFS

This judge is a Bush 43 appointee. No matter, this should be disregarded.

---

Republicans just do not understand the concept of what type of people to appoint as judges. Dems literally never do this to each other. Never!

Tonight’s appellate filings from the DOJ in the White House Ballroom construction case is quite something… https://t.co/CoFVEDPjUv pic.twitter.com/Z4qhNLNBRE

— jake rosen (@JakeMRosen) April 4, 2026

Making it a national security issue is a good way to turn the tide in favor of executive branch

Judge has made his ruling. Now let him enforce it.

In Trump Ballroom case, govt tells Judge Leon that “the entire [Ballroom] project advances critical national-security objectives as an integrated whole” &, therefore, all aspects of construction must proceed apace. ...
1/3https://t.co/hpYedTVqJy pic.twitter.com/025VdI2vSj

— Roger Parloff (@rparloff) April 14, 2026

national security is the winning route. Other side has no real way to contest it.

BMX Bandit said:

---

In Trump Ballroom case, govt tells Judge Leon that “the entire [Ballroom] project advances critical national-security objectives as an integrated whole” &, therefore, all aspects of construction must proceed apace. ...
1/3https://t.co/hpYedTVqJy pic.twitter.com/025VdI2vSj

— Roger Parloff (@rparloff) April 14, 2026

national security is the winning route. Other side has no real way to contest it.

---

What EXACTLY is the goal of the plaintiffs?

To leave a great big hole and **** tons of rubble next to the White House for the next 2.8 years?

I've never really understood the whole concept of their suit...


ETA: I agree with your assessment on national security

Why does this ballroom matter so much to MAGA? Sure seems like it would be priority 367 out of 367 of this administration and the overwhelming majority of you will never see it or be in it.

ts5641 said:

---

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

---

FFS

This judge is a Bush 43 appointee. No matter, this should be disregarded.

---

Republicans just do not understand the concept of what type of people to appoint as judges. Dems literally never do this to each other. Never!

---

When you realise the Bush family is deep-state ingrained via CIA ties then this makes sense.

Davanji84 said:

---

Why does this ballroom matter so much to MAGA? Sure seems like it would be priority 367 out of 367 of this administration and the overwhelming majority of you will never see it or be in it.

---

Why does the ballroom matter so much to TDS that they filed a LAWSUIT to stop it from being built?

Davanji84 said:

---

Why does this ballroom matter so much to MAGA? Sure seems like it would be priority 367 out of 367 of this administration and the overwhelming majority of you will never see it or be in it.

---

My personal theory - MAGA loves it when DJT grifts because he is living the dream. Also why 3 wives a bunny and a porn star are a badge of honor not character flaw.
On a related note I found Tony Soprano to be be a degenerate scumbag and never liked the show. I would think the MAGA loyalists and fans of The Sooranos are high correlated

BTKAG97 said:

---

Davanji84 said:

---

Why does this ballroom matter so much to MAGA? Sure seems like it would be priority 367 out of 367 of this administration and the overwhelming majority of you will never see it or be in it.

---

Seems like it's a bigger deal for the moronic left given how much energy they have expended to ***** about, protest against, and fight it in the courts.

---

I'm still lost. It's a freaking building and the tax payer isn't footing the bill. Might have been nice for the administration to get some consensus before starting. All in all, I just don't see that it's a ditch worth dying in compared to all the other issues that this country faces? My comments apply to both sides of this argument.

Quote:

---

My personal theory - MAGA loves it when DJT grifts because he is living the dream

---

Do you also have a theory that a giant bunny brings eggs on Easter?

That would be more plausible than your theory.

As usual, Trump is running the government as chief executive.

And also as usual, the left hates everything he does, and fights it tooth and nail.

Then, when sane people object to leftist lunacy, the sane people get accused of being crazy.

Sq 17 said:

---

Davanji84 said:

---

Why does this ballroom matter so much to MAGA? Sure seems like it would be priority 367 out of 367 of this administration and the overwhelming majority of you will never see it or be in it.

---

My personal theory - MAGA loves it when DJT grifts because he is living the dream. Also why 3 wives a bunny and a porn star are a badge of honor not character flaw.
On a related note I found Tony Soprano to be be a degenerate scumbag and never liked the show. I would think the MAGA loyalists and fans of The Sooranos are high correlated

---

First glass of wine. I can connect all those dots.

Sq 17 said:

---

My personal theory - MAGA loves it when DJT grifts because he is living the dream. Also why 3 wives a bunny and a porn star are a badge of honor not character flaw.
On a related note I found Tony Soprano to be be a degenerate scumbag and never liked the show. I would think the MAGA loyalists and fans of The Sooranos are high correlated

---

You really gonna go there when JFKennedy and Clinton have held office and were the worst offenders with way more badges of honor?

CDUB98 said:

---

AggiePops said:

---

CDUB98 said:

---

Please find in The Constitution where Congress must approve any renovations to the White House, especially when it is with private money.

---

Amazing what you can find in the Constitution. Obviously minor stuff can be done, but tearing down the East Wing isn't minor. Trump, as was and will be every President, is a temporary resident of the White House. NOT the owner.

Constitutional Basis

• The Property Clause (Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2): This is the primary source of power. It states that "Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States".
• The Enclave Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 17): This grants Congress "exclusive Legislation" over the District of Columbia and other "federal enclaves" (like military bases, arsenals, and dockyards) purchased with state consent.
  Library of Congress Constitution Annotated (.gov) +4

Scope of Power
The Supreme Court has described this authority as "without limitations" in several landmark cases, such as Kleppe v. New Mexico (1976). Key aspects include:
Library of Congress Constitution Annotated (.gov) +1

• Regulatory Control: Congress can enact laws to protect federal lands, including regulating wildlife and activities that may affect those lands, even if they occur on adjacent non-federal property.
• Disposition and Acquisition: Only Congress has the ultimate authority to decide when and how to sell, trade, or give away federal land. While the Executive Branch (e.g., the General Services Administration or U.S. Forest Service) manages these lands day-to-day, they do so only through authority specifically delegated by Congress.
• Supremacy Over States: Federal laws regarding federal property override conflicting state laws under the Supremacy Clause. States generally cannot tax federal property or regulate it in ways that interfere with federal purposes.
• Specific Restrictions: Recent court rulings have reaffirmed that the President cannot construct significant new projects on federal grounds (like the White House) without explicit congressional approval and funding, as seen in the March 2026 halt of a White House ballroom project.
  Library of Congress Constitution Annotated (.gov) +9

---

Oh, so there is no exact wording. Only lawyers inferring and interpreting.


Also, there are other details even in that that require further investigation than your ChatGPT.

- "Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States"

What is written in these "needful rules and regulations? There may actually be allowance. A shallow answer does not suffice.


- "Specific Restrictions: Recent court rulings have reaffirmed that the President cannot construct significant new projects on federal grounds (like the White House) without explicit congressional approval and funding, as seen in the March 2026 halt of a White House ballroom project."

This is where the ChatGPT was a giveaway. Citing the judge's ruling, which is the main reason for out argument. as the main basis for court precedence really shows that there isn't a true application before this. It's pretty comical and weak.


Moving on, I don't really understand why all you Commies are so bent out of shape about this other than your terminal cases of TDS. This is improving the White House, actually making it better. What should everyone do, just leave a giant hole until Trump leaves office or build it back exactly as it was? This whole temper tantrum is dumb, especially considering it is being paid for with private funds.

I don't even like Trump, but this ballroom is 100% inconsequential to anything. It bothers me none since it is private funds. I would feel the same if it were a Dem president. Consistency, something you TDS sufferers know nothing about.

---

Commie? You must be a fascist KKK anti-Semitic, then. I doubt you actually are, so maybe you shouldn't throw ridiculous labels around. Proud American citizen here who used to have Republican leanings until the Party took a hard right. Now just non-Party affiliated citizen disgusted by both extremes.

Davanji84 said:

---

Why does this ballroom matter so much to MAGA? Sure seems like it would be priority 367 out of 367 of this administration and the overwhelming majority of you will never see it or be in it.

---