Trump WH project

Aardvark86 said:

While I’ve not worked my way through all of this (long) opinion, some thoughts.

1. As a process guy, I really dont have much of a problem with the merits decision here. Authorization/appropriations are in legislative control and you gotta check the boxes. (And by the way, these lawsuits are part of the process too, for those who question our functionality these days).
2. It strikes me that the standing analysis is probably right under existing case law. That said, if scotus eventually takes this up, it would not surprise me if they avoided the merits and actually used the case as a vehicle to take on us v scrap’s legacy of “walk in the park” injury or at least to tighten even further some of the stuff they historically say around “particularized injury”. And I don’t just say that because I hate preservation architects, who too often tend to think they should Control everyone’s property rights, often (though not in this case) invoking wildly dubious historical significance of a place.
3. I originally thought this might be viewed as moot given the bulldozers have already done their worst. It’s fair enough though to stay current construction, but it’ll be another interesting thing to think about ultimate relief. The east wing is no more. So the question is ultimately, so what comes next? Rebuild it? I doubt that. Let them finish? Under what authority. Build something else? Who decides what if Congress doesn’t specify, and how long will that a/e contract take to let. Ultimately the net here is something like “a prolonged eyesore” to disturb professor Hoagland’s walks, perhaps until she dies.
4. While this is neither here nor there legally, a friend who works as a nonpolitical White House staff has said there really is a need for a different facility capacity for events.

Click to expand...

Aardvark86 said:

3. I originally thought this might be viewed as moot given the bulldozers have already done their worst. It’s fair enough though to stay current construction, but it’ll be another interesting thing to think about ultimate relief. The east wing is no more. So the question is ultimately, so what comes next? Rebuild it? I doubt that. Let them finish? Under what authority. Build something else? Who decides what if Congress doesn’t specify, and how long will that a/e contract take to let. Ultimately the net here is something like “a prolonged eyesore” to disturb professor Hoagland’s walks, perhaps until she dies.

Click to expand...

tarheelbybirth1 said:

Rebuild the East Wing with 21st century technology. It was due for a redo so now they can rebuild from scratch. Then tear out the f’n patio in the rose garden and restore the lawn. Tear out his walk of presidents. All the while ripping out every piece of cheap-*** gold decor and removing ANY reference to Trump anywhere it might be found.

Click to expand...

lucas80 said:

Even a Republican president will have a lot of renovating to do. Nobody who follows Trump will want to live and work in that mess.
If the ball room gets off the ground and is completed it will have to be modified back into working space and something the public can utilize as part of tours for the WH. It would probably be a good space to display artwork and portraits.
Nobody but Trump wants this thing. Even his core base looks at the ball room and says, "WTF"?

Click to expand...

Wobmam Rulez! said:

Whatever replaces the East wing, it won't be completed until after a new president is inaugurated in 2029.

Click to expand...

Riveting said:

Yes, much safer to have major social events at the local Hilton.

Click to expand...

lucas80 said:

Tl;dr
He’s a tenant, not the owner. Follow the process on renovations. Imagine if you owned a property, and a renter gutted half of it? Then said don’t worry about it, I had a donor cover about half of the costs. You’re only on the hook for the other $300 million.

Click to expand...

Aardvark86 said:

While I’ve not worked my way through all of this (long) opinion, some thoughts.

1. As a process guy, I really dont have much of a problem with the merits decision here. Authorization/appropriations are in legislative control and you gotta check the boxes. (And by the way, these lawsuits are part of the process too, for those who question our functionality these days).
2. It strikes me that the standing analysis is probably right under existing case law. That said, if scotus eventually takes this up, it would not surprise me if they avoided the merits and actually used the case as a vehicle to take on us v scrap’s legacy of “walk in the park” injury or at least to tighten even further some of the stuff they historically say around “particularized injury”. And I don’t just say that because I hate preservation architects, who too often tend to think they should Control everyone’s property rights, often (though not in this case) invoking wildly dubious historical significance of a place.
3. I originally thought this might be viewed as moot given the bulldozers have already done their worst. It’s fair enough though to stay current construction, but it’ll be another interesting thing to think about ultimate relief. The east wing is no more. So the question is ultimately, so what comes next? Rebuild it? I doubt that. Let them finish? Under what authority. Build something else? Who decides what if Congress doesn’t specify, and how long will that a/e contract take to let. Ultimately the net here is something like “a prolonged eyesore” to disturb professor Hoagland’s walks, perhaps until she dies.
4. While this is neither here nor there legally, a friend who works as a nonpolitical White House staff has said there really is a need for a different facility capacity for events.

Click to expand...

LafayetteBear said:

Double A: So what if "the bulldozers have already done their work!" The relevant question is now "What comes after?" In other words, what are they gonna build to replace the former East Wing? I have no philosophical objection to the notion of a ballroom. Fine, we will have a place that is part of the White House complex in which to host social events. But I have to say that the scale of Trump's proposed ballroom is off the charts. Both from the inside and the outside, it looks WAY too big. It would dwarf the rest of the White House. (And, BTW, where are the Office of the First Lady and other former occupants of the East Wing gonna go?)

If you are a process guy, then you HAVE to love the fact that the courts shut Trump down. The White House is the people's house, and he is nothing more than a tenant. Congress should make this decision with input from the White House Historical Society or whatever historical preservation organization it is that has traditionally been regarded as deserving a voice in modifications to the White House. Frankly, I could care less if the eyesore continues for awhile. Vindicating the principle here (i.e., that the president cannot tear down and rebuild the White House on his own unilateral whim) is much more important to me.

If the Supreme Court uses the concept of standing to dispense with objections and hurdles to Trump's unilateral demolition of the East Wing and construction of a ginormous, gold plated ballroom, I am gonna be pissed, and I'll bet that I won't be alone.

Click to expand...

LafayetteBear said:

If you are a process guy, then you HAVE to love the fact that the courts shut Trump down.

Click to expand...

bagdropper said:

Yep.

Hell, I want it to wind up being a complete stop of construction, without restarting, right up to January 20, 2029. Let that obscene hole in the White House grounds shine proudly as The Crowning Achievement of Trump's second term - right ahead of the cesspool that is now the reflecting pool..

These need to sink in to every single citizen of this country going forward just how much of an absolute disaster this term has been - so much that future presidents, SC justices and Congress learn a lesson none of them will ever forget until the end of time.

EVERYTHING HE TOUCHED...

Click to expand...

lucas80 said:

$100 says the SCOTUS twists themselves into a position where the ball room must be allowed to go forward due to national security interests. It's BS, but, they are tired of the death threats. They'll do what every other Republican has done, give the baby his bottle, and tel themselves. they will be in charge again some day.

Click to expand...

TigerGrowls said:

Click to expand...

baltimorened said:

yep, I agree, best thing to happen would be for trump just to put up some form of water barrier over the hole, and leave the WH the way it is. Let the Congress decide what to do...continue, or just fill in the holes in the ground and building

Click to expand...