Well, well, well — look who didn’t slap a restraining order on President Trump this time. Somebody alert the media (oh wait, they already did — begrudgingly). You know things are weird in D.C. when a federal judge doesn’t leap into action to block a Trump initiative. It’s like spotting a unicorn — or finding a balanced budget in California.
Let’s be clear: if you so much as sneeze near a MAGA hat in the Beltway, there’s a line of litigious activists ready to claim it’s a constitutional crisis. And this time, the horror — the horror — was that President Trump dared to break ground on a privately funded White House ballroom without filing every possible form in triplicate and holding a candlelight seance with the National Capital Planning Commission.
The activist group — the National Trust for Historic Preservation, if you’re trying to keep up with all the acronyms — allegedly claims that the administration skipped a few procedural steps, which in D.C. is about as shocking as discovering someone double-parked in Georgetown.
But U.S. District Judge Richard Leon (gasp! A Bush appointee not joining the Resistance?) actually said “not today,” denying the temporary restraining order and letting construction roll on. Yes, below-ground construction. Because nothing screams “irreparable harm” like some men in hard hats digging a hole near an old building. The pearl-clutching from the usual suspects was immediate — you’d think Trump had installed a Chick-fil-A on the South Lawn.
To make it even more satisfying, Trump critics are absolutely melting down over the price tag — $300 million — even though, let me say it again for the people in the back: it’s privately funded. As in, not one red cent from taxpayers. Not like, oh, I don’t know, the billions in federal cash that somehow evaporated into the Minnesota ether under Gov. Tim Walz’s watch while fake food programs allegedly handed out money like Halloween candy. But sure, let’s obsess over a ballroom.
The left is fuming:
Judge allows Trump White House ballroom work to go forward–but WH must submit plans for review in 2 weeks
www.washingtonpost.c…Idiotic and shameful: before I can renovate a kitchen–or even put up a fence, I need to pull permits that meet regulatory standards
— Jim Wald (@citizenwald.bsky.social) December 16, 2025 at 6:36 PM
Folks, before the ruling, the left was frothing at the mouth, giddy:
A judge is unhappy with Trump’s ballroom but may have to wait longer to act. Another judge takes action against DOJ. Trump’s Chief of Staff clashes internally. Trump files another defamation case.
All this and much at the Intersection with Michael Popok on the MeidasTouch Network. LIVE at 8 pm ET!
— Legal AF (@legalafmtn.bsky.social) December 16, 2025 at 7:03 PM
Should the White House proceed with ballroom construction despite legal challenges?
Trump ballroom construction must go on as a matter of “security,” admin says
— Axios (@axios.com) December 16, 2025 at 10:34 AM
California’s own high-gloss Twitter warrior, Gavin Newsom, couldn’t resist either. He fired off some snide remarks about the project — from his perch in Sacramento, where, coincidentally, a shiny new state capitol annex is being built. No price transparency, no fiscal accountability, and definitely no activist lawsuits in sight. Funny how that works.
Meanwhile, Attorney General Pam Bondi, ever the Florida bulldog, is not backing down. She’s made it clear the administration is ready to defend the project in court. And to be fair, the legal wrangling isn’t over. The judge has set a follow-up hearing for next year and wants the administration to check in with the appropriate planning commissions by the end of the month. Yes, the same commissions that — if we’re being honest — exist mostly to keep bureaucrats employed and rubber-stamp things with just enough delay to pretend they’re doing oversight.
Of course, the National Trust’s attorney, Tad Heuer, threw out a snarky line about the administration always promising things “in two weeks.” Real original. We get it — you’re bitter because for once, the judge didn’t pull out the ol’ judicial veto pen and shut it all down.
Now, let’s talk about the actual project: a White House ballroom. Is it grand? Absolutely. Is it controversial? Only if you think a president investing private money into a functional, multi-use space at the most important residence in the country is somehow an act of tyranny. And yet the media treats it like he’s building a golf course on the Lincoln Memorial.
Newsflash: presidents have upgraded the White House before. Renovations, additions, and redesigns have happened under FDR, Truman, Nixon — you name it. But because it’s Trump and because he’s actually getting something done, suddenly it’s the apocalypse.
Let’s just say it: if this were President Michelle Obama breaking ground on a taxpayer-funded “ballroom of inclusivity,” the headlines would read, “Historic Expansion Celebrates Equity in Architecture.” There’d be PBS specials and kids writing poems about it.
Instead, we get activist lawsuits, performative outrage, and governors with actual taxpayer messes pointing fingers at a man building with his own funds.
So yes, for once, a judge didn’t jump in to stop the Trump train. And in 2025, that feels almost revolutionary. But hey — check back in two weeks.
The post Judge Issues Ruling On Construction of Ballroom At White House appeared first on Red Right Patriot.
