Did Donald Trump obtain permission to build a ballroom at Trump Tower or another property?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Donald Trump began demolition of the White House East Wing and site preparation for a 90,000‑square‑foot “ballroom” months before formal plans were filed; the White House has not yet submitted full plans for NCPC approval and preservation groups have sued to halt work pending required reviews [1] [2] [3]. The National Trust for Historic Preservation argues the project bypassed mandatory federal review, saying no president may construct such a public‑property ballroom without public review; the White House says plans will be filed with the National Capital Planning Commission soon and that the NCPC’s jurisdiction covers construction but not the earlier demolition [4] [3] [2] [5].
1. Demolition first, approvals later — the timeline that triggered the fight
The controversy centers on the sequence: Trump announced the ballroom project and demolition of the East Wing proceeded; construction and site‑preparation work began while formal design plans had not yet been submitted to the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC), prompting preservationists to say required reviews were skipped [1] [2] [3]. Reporting says construction began in September 2025 but the White House was still preparing to submit plans to federal planning bodies as late as December 2025 [1] [6].
2. Who grants permission — and what the White House says about jurisdiction
Federal planning bodies historically review major changes to the White House; the NCPC and the Commission of Fine Arts are the agencies preservationists point to [5]. The White House and allies have argued that NCPC’s authority applies to the construction phase, not demolition, a distinction the administration used to justify earlier work; White House aides said the proposal will be submitted to the NCPC for approval, but that submission had not yet occurred in reporting [2] [5].
3. The preservationists’ legal claim: permission was required before work
The National Trust for Historic Preservation filed suit seeking to halt the ballroom project until comprehensive design reviews, environmental assessments, public comment and congressional authorization occur, arguing the administration demolished the East Wing and began construction without those statutorily required steps [3] [7]. Their complaint plainly states that “no president is legally allowed to construct a ballroom on public property without giving the public the opportunity to weigh in,” a contention central to the lawsuit [4] [7].
4. The White House position and its timetable for formal review
Multiple outlets report the White House plans to submit ballroom plans to the NCPC and has appointed new architecture leadership for the project; Will Scharf — named by Trump as NCPC chair and White House staff secretary — told the commission the long‑awaited plans would be filed in December [1] [2] [6]. Reuters and PBS emphasize that the administration says it will seek NCPC approval for construction, but had not done so at the time of reporting [2] [3].
5. Political and procedural stakes: private funding, size and public reaction
Trump has characterized the ballroom as privately funded and insisted it won’t cost taxpayers, while critics point to the project’s extraordinary scale — a reported 90,000 square feet, intended to accommodate up to 999 guests — and growing public opposition in polls cited by news outlets [1] [4]. Preservation groups and some members of Congress have proposed legislation and called for transparency about donor influence, underscoring the political stakes tied to approvals and oversight [8] [4].
6. Competing interpretations and the courtroom as arbiter
News organizations convey two competing readings: preservationists say the administration violated federal review laws by demolishing before review; the White House contends the NCPC governs construction and that it will submit plans for review — a timing and jurisdiction dispute now moving into federal court [5] [2] [3]. The lawsuit asks a judge to stop further work until formal reviews and congressional discussion occur, which will force a legal interpretation of which preconstruction steps were required and when [7].
7. What reporting does not yet show
Available sources do not mention any prior permit or formal NCPC approval granted before demolition and initial site work; reporting instead documents that plans had not been submitted and that legal action was filed because reviews had not occurred [2] [3] [7]. Sources do not provide a court ruling at the time of these reports; they document filings and statements from both sides [7] [3].
Conclusion — The question “Did Trump obtain permission?” cannot be answered affirmatively on the available reporting: preservation groups and multiple news outlets say no federal planning commission approval had been submitted or granted before demolition and early construction, while the White House states it will seek NCPC approval for the construction phase [3] [2] [7]. The pending lawsuit will test the legal boundaries of demolition vs. construction jurisdiction and whether required public reviews were improperly bypassed [7] [5].