By Lydia Wheeler
WASHINGTON -- President Trump has been on a renovation spree since moving back into the White House, but his penchant for remodeling is leading to an escalating legal feud with his neighbors.
The former real-estate developer started by paving over the grass in the Rose Garden t o accommodate women in high heels, marbling the Lincoln Bedroom bathroom and tearing down the East Wing to build a ballroom.
It was when Trump unveiled plans to put a coat of white paint on one of the neighboring buildings -- the ornate, 19th-century Eisenhower Executive Office Building next to the West Wing -- that he began to run into more concerted resistance. Preservationists have sued to stop him from painting the gray granite facade. Last week, that litigation sparked further unease that Trump is targeting other historic landmarks in the city, including buildings with priceless murals.
Then a leading preservation organization filed a lawsuit Friday seeking to stop Trump's ballroom from being built until Congress has signed off on the project plans. A judge is set to hold a key initial hearing in the case on Tuesday.
"It seems as though the president is treating the federal portfolio as if it's his own personal portfolio," said Rebecca Miller, executive director of the DC Preservation League, which is involved in the lawsuit against the Eisenhower paint project.
Trump has spent decades tussling with residents and politicians over development projects that changed city skylines from New York to Chicago. As president, he has been enjoying newfound freedom in his second term to do as he wishes to the White House without much standing in his way.
Trump said he is bringing back the classical stylings of ancient Athens and Rome that the capital city was modeled after, declaring his intention to "make federal architecture beautiful again."
He announced his plans to paint the Eisenhower building during a recent Fox News appearance. "It was always considered an ugly building and it's actually one of the most beautiful buildings ever built," he said, showing renderings of the office washed in white.
While the suit over the Eisenhower building -- described as one of the nation's finest examples of "French Second Empire style" -- has gained some early traction, the presiding judge in the case last week questioned whether she can stop the president.
Lawyers in the case say Trump is skirting historic preservation and impact studies required under federal law and making an end run around the General Services Administration, which manages and maintains federal properties.
Greg Werkheiser, one of the lawyers who filed the lawsuit, said nothing is wrong with wanting to spruce up federal buildings, but there are proper ways to preserve historic structures, especially those made of granite. "Paint traps moisture, ruins the mortar, weakens and cracks the rock," he said.
The Justice Department said the paint job wasn't a certainty and argued there was no reason for a judge to police what for now remains a hypothetical project.
The court proceedings caused a stir after the plaintiffs submitted a sworn declaration from a former GSA official who said the White House is soliciting bids to demolish several historic office buildings in Washington. The claimed targets included a Brutalist structure that houses the Department of Housing and Urban Development and two buildings that contain historically important murals inside that were commissioned during the New Deal era.
The report alarmed art historians, who are now working to get more information. Laura Katzman, a James Madison University art history professor, said she and others fear Trump will tear down the buildings before the fragile artwork can be preserved. "We know he's capable of doing things without approval," said Katzman, who wrote an official brochure about the Ben Shahn murals in one of the buildings in the 1990s.
In a statement, GSA spokeswoman Marianne Copenhaver called the reported planned demolitions a "manufactured narrative built on speculation." The agency said in a sworn declaration that it was evaluating the assets for sale, not demolition.
Trump isn't the first president to spark controversy in his efforts to remake the White House and its surroundings. Former President Harry Truman faced opposition from Congress when he added a balcony to the building in 1948, said Timothy Naftali, a presidential historian at Columbia University School of International and Public Affairs. Truman's predecessor Franklin D. Roosevelt also drew backlash after he used military funding to expand the East Wing.
When Trump started tearing down the East Wing to build a 90,000 square-foot ballroom in its place, a Virginia attorney rushed to court to stop him, but didn't submit a filing needed for the court to consider the case. After the building was demolished within hours of his submission, the lawyer decided to drop his case.
The new lawsuit appears less likely to go away. The National Trust for Historic Preservation argues Trump is evading reviews required by federal law and lacks the unilateral authority to direct the project. The group, which is being represented by former President Barack Obama's former White House counsel Gregory Craig, says a judge should halt construction until the proper approvals are in place from Congress and federal commissions that typically oversee projects in the capital city.
"No president is legally allowed to tear down portions of the White House without any review whatsoever -- not President Trump, not President Biden, and not anyone else," the nonprofit said in its initial court filing.
White House spokesman Davis Ingle said, "President Trump has full legal authority to modernize, renovate, and beautify the White House -- just like all of his predecessors did."
Write to Lydia Wheeler at lydia.wheeler@wsj.com
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
December 16, 2025 05:00 ET (10:00 GMT)
Copyright (c) 2025 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Comments