A federal judge on Feb. 26 allowed the ongoing ballroom construction project at the White House to continue, rejecting a preservation organization’s request to halt it for the second time in two months.

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon denied a motion for a preliminary injunction, finding the plaintiff, the National Trust for Historic Preservation, cited the wrong legal authorities in its motion. The plaintiff “bases its challenge on a ragtag group of theories under the Administrative Procedure Act and the Constitution,” the Washington-based judge said.

The Administrative Procedure Act is a federal statute enacted in 1946 that governs administrative law procedures for federal executive departments and independent agencies, often requiring public input regarding government actions. The late Sen. Pat McCarran (D-Nev.) said the law was “a bill of rights for the hundreds of thousands of Americans whose affairs are controlled or regulated in one way or another by agencies of the federal government.”

Leon said the group may refile the request in the future if it properly amends its legal complaint.

Construction on the project, which involves demolishing part of the executive mansion and building a 90,000-square-foot ballroom, began in September 2025. President Donald Trump had said the ballroom project was necessary because the East Room—the largest room for gatherings in the White House—was too small and in poor shape.

The project is expected to cost about $400 million, all of which is expected to be funded by private donors, including Trump himself. The Trump administration released a list of the private donors in October 2025. The project is expected to be completed by 2028.

The National Trust is a private, charitable, educational nonprofit corporation that Congress chartered in 1949.

In the most recent version of its complaint, the National Trust said the Trump administration moved forward with the ballroom project without seeking approval from Congress or the federal commissions overseeing development in the nation’s capital.

The plaintiff also said the administration failed to carry out the required environmental studies, or to allow the public to comment on the project.

“No president is legally allowed to tear down portions of the White House without any review whatsoever … and no president is legally allowed to construct a ballroom on public property without giving the public the opportunity to weigh in,” the National Trust said.

Leon said in his new ruling that the challenge fails, at least for now, because the plaintiff did not bring the right kind of legal claim challenging the president’s authority under federal law to complete the project with private funds and in the absence of congressional approval, Leon said.

Leon said he was denying the motion “for lack of likelihood of success on the merits.”

The court “cannot address the merits of the novel and weighty issues” of the case until the plaintiff amends its existing complaint to include the claim that the president is exceeding his lawful authority, the judge added.

Trump celebrated the new ruling in a Truth Social post, saying that the court’s decision is “great news for America, and our wonderful White House.”

“The Judge on the case of what will be the most beautiful Ballroom anywhere in the World, has just thrown out, and completely erased, the effort to stop its construction,” the president said.

Construction is “ahead of schedule, and under budget,” and the new ballroom will “stand long into the future as a symbol to the Greatness of America,” he added.

Leon also previously denied a request for a temporary restraining order to block construction in an order on Dec. 17, 2025.

The litigation is still underway.

Reached for comment, Sophia Schintzel, public affairs manager for the National Trust for Historic Preservation, said her organization was disappointed that the court did not issue an injunction.

At the same time, the National Trust is pleased that the court “encouraged us to amend our complaint … to assert that the president has acted beyond his statutory authority—and we plan to do so promptly,” she told The Epoch Times.

This article by Matthew Vadum appeared Feb. 26, 2026, in The Epoch Times.