Court rules Trump needs approval for White House ballroom

An appeals court has ruled that US President Donald Trump must seek approval

from Congress to build his proposed White House ballroom.

The court says construction must stop.

The US Court of Appeals sided with historic preservationists

who sued to stop construction of a ballroom at the White House.

The court said it would stay its own ruling for two weeks to allow

the administration to appeal to the US Supreme Court.

The court wrote, "Whether or not a massive ballroom should be constructed

is for Congress to decide and is not a matter for Executive self-help."

The court added, "This holding has nothing at all to do with whether

the proposed ballroom is desirable, or not, as a matter of policy.

This ruling does not even necessarily mean that the Defendants

may not ultimately construct the ballroom. What is does mean,

is that the Defendants may not do so

during the district court's expeditious litigation

without securing Congress's authorisation, as the Constitution and laws require.

This as Senators had mixed reactions Friday to the federal appeals

court ruling of the 400 million-dollar ballroom.

Peter Welch Democratic Senator, Vermont said

We will never give presidential approval for the Arc de Triomphe

or the East Wing ballroom.

These are vanity projects and some reports indicate that the president

is spending literally 70 percent of his time.

The president is a busy person and there's

a lot of things he's got to pay attention to, including the war in Iran. So no.

John Hoeven, Republican Senator, North Dakota said

The president's raised a lot of private money to fund it,

and that's going to be something that future administrations can use,

whether they're Republican or Democrat. That's a benefit.

And so I think one way or another, yeah, we'll work through it and get it done.

Ben Ray Lujan, Democratic Senator, New Mexico said

The president has said that folks were going to chip in pay for it,

and it was not going to be at the cost of the American taxpayer.

That's already proven to be untrue. So it's not surprising that courts

are weighing in and saying, no, you have to follow the rules.

And let's see what happens as this gets to higher courts as well.