A Washington federal judge raised concerns about a “nightmare scenario” where construction begins on President Donald Trump’s 250-foot arch without notice, as when the White House East Wing was demolished to make way for his planned ballroom.
Judge Tanya Chutkan of the US District Court for the District of Columbia considered a request at a hearing Thursday to block the administration from building an “Independence Arch,” which the White House has proposed in honor of the nation’s 250th anniversary in July.
The hearing was held two days after a different Washington federal judge, Richard Leon, moved to halt construction of the ballroom after finding Trump didn’t have legal authority to do it, months after the sudden dismantling of the historic East Wing .
That case loomed large over Thursday’s hearing. Chutkan frequently raised concerns that construction might begin on the arch before she could rule, despite government claims that the project was in its early stages.
“What I do not want is for ground to be broken while this case is pending,” Chutkan told Justice Department lawyer Bradley Craigmyle.
The judge said she doesn’t “want to wake up in the morning” to an emergency request from the challengers in the case and “bulldozers” in Washington’s Memorial Circle, the stated intended location for the arch. And a declaration from a National Park Service official stating that planning was still in early stages “does not satisfy me” that this won’t happen, Chutkan said.
A group of Vietnam War veterans claimed in a lawsuit in February that the administration appears to be bypassing Congress and other legally required reviews.
Memorial Circle is near the Arlington Memorial Bridge and Arlington National Cemetery. Trump has said he hopes it would be 250 feet tall, in honor of the anniversary, which would make it the largest monumental arch in the world, according to the lawsuit.
Trump posted multiple renderings of a future arch on Truth Social in January and a watercolor image of the arch in October. Trump also said in an interview with Politico in December that construction would begin in a few months.
Still, the Justice Department has argued that the lawsuit was premature and that no decisions have been made. The department submitted a declaration by a top official with the National Park Service, who said the project “is in the conceptual phase” and that the administration would comply with all legal requirements if it moved beyond that.
Chutkan appeared frustrated at times with Craigmyle. She pressed him on how much weight the court should give the president’s posts about plans for the arch on social media.
“Given what happened to the White House ballroom, why should I not take those statements seriously?” Chutkan asked.
Craigmyle insisted that the president’s posts, and news reports about them, were “hearsay” that shouldn’t be given as much weight as the park service official’s sworn declaration.
Chutkan also pushed back at Craigmyle after he told the judge that he was “unaware” of any concrete steps taken toward constructing an arch.
“That is my problem,” Chutkan said. She said that “one would expect” that Craigmyle would know the answers to these “very basic questions” from preparing for the case, and the fact that he came to court without it “is troubling to me.”
Nicolas Sansone of Public Citizen, a lawyer for the challengers, told Chutkan that the White House ballroom case, in which construction began without warning, shows in “stark terms” how these situations can play out.
Chutkan asked both sides to meet and notify the court by the end of the day Friday if they’re able to agree on a consent order that would state all government officials named in the lawsuit wouldn’t begin construction while the case is pending. The judge also invited the government to submit additional declarations from White House officials involved attesting to what steps have been taken so far.
“Given what happened in Judge Leon’s case, that’s information the court should have,” Chutkan said, referring to the White House ballroom challenge.
The arch is one of multiple Trump’s planned renovations to historic buildings in the capital.
In addition to the White House case, the administration is also facing challenges to its plans to rename and close the Kennedy Center for renovations, and to plans to paint the granite exterior of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, which houses offices for White House staff.
The case is Lemmon v. Trump, D.D.C., No. 1:26-cv-00544, hearing held 4/2/26.
To contact the reporter on this story:
To contact the editors responsible for this story: