Skip to main content

A concrete frame and four towering walls: How Trump’s ballroom, blocked by appeals court, has taken shape

(CNN) — President Donald Trump has dug himself a hole.

The future of construction on his sprawling East Wing ballroom is uncertain after a divided appeals court ruled Friday that he is unlawfully constructing the project.

What happens next could be up to the nation’s highest court — to which Trump said he’d appeal — potentially Congress and maybe even his successor.

“There is no clear path to this being resolved one way or the other while he is president. The likelihood that we have a hole in the ground because of political realities — not because of construction realities — is very high through the end of his term,” said Greg Werkheiser, a historic preservationist and lawyer who is embroiled in a separate lawsuit with the White House over another Trump pursuit, an effort to paint the nearby Eisenhower Executive Office Building.

The ballroom — like many of Trump’s construction projects around Washington, DC — is unpopular with the public. But it’s a major priority for the president, who has championed it at every opportunity and been involved in design details big and small.

“The entire Complex, Military and all, is largely built, fabricated, and paid for. Much is already on site, or being delivered,” Trump wrote on Truth Social after Friday’s ruling, blasting the court and asking why the nation’s top historic preservation group didn’t sue before construction started.

Nearly six months of construction

Planning for the ballroom began in the early months of Trump’s second term, with the White House formally announcing it on July 31, 2025.

The announcement made no mention of demolishing the East Wing, which for decades served as headquarters for first ladies and their staff, nor did it frame the project as a national security imperative — an argument Trump didn’t begin making until February 2026.

In late October 2025, the East Wing was razed and workers began a monthslong excavation effort resulting in a very large hole in the ground. The National Trust for Historic Preservation launched a legal challenge in December.

In late February 2026, crews began work on the foundation, filling in that hole with the below-ground portion of the building, which will house a highly secretive underground bunker complex aimed at modernizing aging underground infrastructure.

So far, according to a CNN analysis of photos and floor plans, the above-ground construction of the ballroom has been limited to pouring heavily reinforced concrete columns, walls and floors. The areas where the concrete frame has been completed include new offices for the first lady, some of the kitchen and some entry halls. Above the ground floor, crews have built four towering walls, almost to the planned height of the building, and begun assembling formwork to pour the floor of the actual ballroom.

Construction has progressed at a rapid pace, but the new structure isn’t close to being occupiable.

As the scope of the project has evolved, so has the price tag. The ballroom was initially introduced at “approximately $200 million,” with Trump emphasizing it would be privately paid for as the cost ticked up to $300 and then $400 million.

Then this spring, Senate Republicans requested $1 billion that would go, in part, toward security related to the project, although that effort ultimately failed, with some in Trump’s own party worried about the optics of funding a ballroom while Americans are struggling. The funding picture became more complicated when a project summary, obtained by the Washington Post in June, estimated its price at $600 million, more than half of which would come from taxpayers.

What happens next

The crux of the legal challenge isn’t the 90,000-square-foot structure, its placement atop the South Lawn or even the 2025 demolition of the historic East Wing. Instead, it’s the processes Trump ignored along the way: bypassing congressional approval and breaking ground before required reviews and assessments were completed.

The president maintains the project isn’t subject to any oversight. But it’s become mired in a complicated legal battle without a clear resolution ahead.

This state of uncertainty, Werkheiser told CNN, “illustrates that the morass he’s gotten himself into with all these projects. It’s not that he can’t do them. It’s just that he refuses to do them legally, and that makes it that much more difficult for him to execute them than they would be if he just followed the rules in the first place.”

On Friday, the appeals court said Trump must stop construction until Congress approves the project, but the judges paused their ruling for two weeks so the administration could have a chance to appeal to the Supreme Court — which Trump vowed to do “immediately.” Once that request is in, the justices will have to decide whether they will let the lower-court ruling take effect for now.

Separately, the Supreme Court will also have to decide whether it will review the lower-court ruling against the project at all. Should the justices take up the case, recent divisions within the court’s conservative supermajority suggest that a win for Trump isn’t guaranteed.

Some White House officials have questioned what will happen if the Supreme Court declines to take up the case, but the overall sentiment from top legal advisers is that the administration is well-positioned to win the case and it’s not time to be concerned yet, according to a person familiar with the matter.

If Trump secures a victory, construction could continue on a project whose completion he’s estimated by summer 2028, a few months before the end of his second term.

It’s also possible that the court finds Trump must secure congressional approval before the project can resume, which would set up a major political test for the president’s party. Approval would become especially unlikely if Democrats gain power of either chamber in the November midterms.

And public opinion isn’t on the president’s side: In a recent CNN poll, 58% of Americans said they were dissatisfied or angry about Trump’s projects around DC, like the ballroom and renovations at the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool.

Trump began messaging the ballroom as a national security necessity in late February. He zeroed in on that message after Friday’s ruling, saying it’s “being built for the protection of our Country and, additionally, all future Presidents” and highlighting some of the features of the underground bunker, including bomb shelters, medical facilities and top-secret military facilities.

But the appeals court said Trump could continue work on the below-ground complex even while construction of the above-ground ballroom is paused, with the judges noting that the president could, for example, “put a fully protective covering over the underground construction and other exposed portions of the construction site” to ensure the bunker isn’t unprotected.

Experts suggested to CNN that even if ballroom construction is legally forced to come to a halt, work on the bunker could proceed to eliminate the national security threat Trump has warned exists and also shore up the hole from any health and safety hazards.

“Hypothetically, if you stop construction now, you could redesign this and have an underground facility and reconstruct the East Wing on top of it and just close off the site. There are other alternatives beyond completing the ballroom,” said Bryan Clark Green, an architectural historian who previously served on the National Capital Planning Commission, one of the review boards that approved the ballroom in April after being stacked with Trump loyalists.

Trump’s construction obsession

Trump, a former real estate developer, has made construction his second job as president — one he believes is part of his legacy, sources familiar with his thinking have said.

“The thing I do best in life is build,” he told reporters during a May field trip to observe the ballroom construction.

The president lashed out at the appeals court repeatedly on Friday, underscoring the personal stakes as he cast the ruling as “a National Disgrace” and “horrendous, politically motivated, and unlawful.”

But in Friday’s majority opinion, DC Circuit Court Judges Patricia Millett, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, and Brad Garcia, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, placed the blame squarely on Trump.

“Any risk caused by the construction project and its multi-year timetable is overwhelmingly a problem of the Defendants’ own creation,” they wrote.

The judges continued: “The Defendants unilaterally and likely without lawful authority destroyed a large portion of the White House structure and dug an open pit in its place. Then, after commencing a lengthy construction project, they publicly announced to the world the vulnerabilities that self-chosen endeavor has created.”

The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.

Julián Álvarez fue silbado y se fue sin saludar a la afición: ¿qué sigue en la novela del argentino?

No fue un domingo cualquiera para Julián Álvarez. En realidad, no lo ha sido ningún día desde aquella frase que pronunció durante la Copa del Mundo: “lo mejor para todos es una transferencia”, cuando se hablaba de un fuerte interés del FC Barcelona por contratarlo. El fichaje no se hizo —porque el Atlético de Madrid no quiso negociar— y aquellas siete palabras, pronunciadas a un océano de distancia de España, le ganaron la enemistad de toda la afición del Atlético de Madrid, el club que pagó por él más de US$ 87 millones hace dos temporadas.La afición le hizo pagar esas palabras este domingo, en la primera vez que el delantero argentino pisó el estadio Metropolitano, cuando ingresó en el segundo tiempo de un partido que el Colchonero empataba 1-1. Pero ni la urgencia del resultado ni la necesidad por los goles de Álvarez —acaso su mejor centroatacante— para revertirlo le hicieron olvidar a las gradas rojiblancas las palabras del número 9, que recibió una silbatina generalizada al momento de ingresar al campo (ya había sido reprobado por el estadio durante el calentamiento).Álvarez no tuvo un buen ingreso y, aunque su equipo acabó rescatando un empate con 10 jugadores cerca del final, el goleador argentino se llevó la imagen final, sin participar del tradicional saludo que hace el Atlético, dando la vuelta al campo para agradecer a la afición. El delantero se fue a los vestuarios en soledad. Un gesto que, como dice el dicho, vale más que mil palabras.“Me comentaba la gente del club, que el club decidió que él no se acerque a saludar con sus compañeros a la gente. La decisión no fue de Julián Alvarez, fue del club, que tomó la decisión de alejarlo y separarlo para que se vaya hacia el vestuario”, dijo su director técnico, Diego Simeone, tras el juego.Queda exactamente una semana del mercado de fichajes en Europa, por lo que la presencia de Julián Álvarez en el Atlético de Madrid sigue estando en el aire para el resto de la temporada. El problema es que la reacción de la afición este domingo parece mostrar un punto de no retorno en la relación con el futbolista, que tampoco ha salido a expresar una disculpa o una explicación a sus dichos durante el Mundial.Un problema aún mayor es que, pese al deseo de ser transferido que tiene el jugador, el club no tiene ninguna intención de desprenderse de él y, conforme van pasando los días, el mercado se va achicando, porque al conocer las altas demandas de la directiva del Colchonero, los interesados salen a buscar alternativas, apurados por la fecha límite del 1 de septiembre.Por supuesto, el Atleti, a medida que pasan las horas, tiene cada vez menos deseos de abrirle la puerta de salida, porque se quedaría con muy poco tiempo para salir a buscarle un reemplazo al futbolista estrella que tiene la plantilla. Hallar un sustituto para el jugador que marcó 49 goles y dio 17 asistencias en 107 partidos con el club supondría muchos millones arriba de la mesa, posiblemente teniendo que pagar un valor más alto que de lo que dicta el mercado.Los destinos para Julián Álvarez son muy pocos. El Atleti ya dejó claro que no va a negociar con clubes españoles, porque no quiere reforzar a la competencia. Fuera de España, solo se conoció el interés del Arsenal y uno más pequeño del PSG. Ninguno prosperó, en parte por el deseo del jugador de vestirse de blaugrana.Los Gunners, campeones de la Premier League y subcampeones de la Champions League, podrían hacer el intento, a pesar de que en el ataque ya tienen muchas alternativas. Por eso se había barajado la idea de que los londinenses pusieran dinero y algún futbolista —como Viktor Gyökeres, por ejemplo— en la mesa de negociación, algo que le cerraría a la directiva española, ya que el jugador se iría a otra liga y tendría garantizado un nombre de reemplazo. Sin embargo, si la idea no prosperó es porque o no hubo acuerdo por el monto de dinero, o porque el futbolista no tiene grandes deseos de volver a una liga de la cual ya se fue —jugó en el Manchester City de 2022 a 2024—.La posibilidad de los parisinos se mencionó mucho al comienzo del mercado de fichajes, pero fue perdiendo fuerza con el correr de los días. Mucho más desde que los bicampeones de Europa se hicieron con los servicios de Ferran Torres, el héroe de la final del Mundial 2026, que ya empezó a pagar la confianza de Luis Enrique con goles, marcando un doblete en su presentación, también este domingo.Entonces, el futuro de Julián Álvarez parece estar entre tres destinos: quedarse en el Atlético, ya sea para revertir la situación o para esperar la ventana de transferencias de enero; reflotar la idea de volver a la Premier League, pero con la camiseta del Arsenal —un equipo que quizás tampoco seduce tanto por el estilo de juego que tienen los dirigidos por Arteta—; o que el FC Barcelona finalmente abra la chequera y ponga muchísimos millones arriba de la mesa, 500 millones de euros, para ser exactos, que es su cláusula de recisión. Una cifra jamás pagada por un futbolista, y por mucha diferencia.“Primero, juntos siempre somos más fuertes. Eso siempre nos caracterizó siendo el Atlético de Madrid distinto al resto. Julián es un jugador nuestro”, dijo Giuliano Simeone —autor del empate 2-2— a la prensa tras el partido.“Tenemos que estar todos juntos tirando para el mismo lado, porque, si no, nos vamos a dividir y eso no es bueno. Julián es jugador nuestro y vamos a apoyarlo siempre”, agregó el mediocampista.Su padre, el entrenador del equipo, también defendió a Julián Álvarez, pero con un poco más de cautela.“No estoy para dar consejos. Tengo que centrarme en mi trabajo, que es deportivamente hacer lo mejor para el Atlético de Madrid. Si el Atlético de Madrid quiere ganar algún título necesitamos estar juntos, tener delanteros importantes y para eso necesitamos trabajar en consecuencia todos de lo que necesitamos”, dijo en la rueda de prensa.“Creo que fui bastante claro. Necesitamos estar juntos. Cuando estuvimos juntos siempre hemos podido hacer cosas importantes”.The-CNN-Wire™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.
Read Next Story