President Donald Trump’s ambitious plan to transform the White House with a Mar-a-Lago–inspired ballroom has become one of the most controversial architectural projects in Washington’s recent memory. What began as a $200 million proposal for a modestly sized event space has ballooned into a $400 million, 90,000-square-foot annex that will replace the historic East Wing and, according to critics, alter the very character of the nation’s most iconic residence.
The saga reached a new milestone on December 17, 2025, when Trump himself confirmed at the White House’s Hanukkah reception that the budget for the ballroom had doubled and that the project was expected to be completed by the summer of 2028, according to People. That announcement came on the heels of a federal judge’s decision not to halt construction, despite a flurry of legal challenges and preservationist outcry. The East Wing, which had stood since 1902 and housed the offices of every first lady since Eleanor Roosevelt, was demolished at the end of October, clearing the way for the new structure.
The project’s evolution has been anything but smooth. The original plans, announced in July 2025, envisioned a ballroom seating 650 people at a cost of $200 million. By September, Trump told NBC News that the space would be “a little bigger,” and by December, the capacity had reportedly soared to 1,350, with the price tag rising accordingly. The ballroom is now set to be larger than the main White House mansion itself, which totals 55,000 square feet.
Architectural leadership has shifted as well. James McCrery, the original lead architect, stepped down after clashing with Trump over the ever-expanding scale of the project. As reported by The Washington Post, McCrery believed the new ballroom would “dwarf” the main residence, a concern that ultimately led to his replacement by Shalom Baranes, a Washington-based architect with a reputation for large-scale civic projects.
For preservationists and design experts, the project has raised alarm bells. The National Park Service (NPS), which manages the White House grounds, released a report stating the new annex would “disrupt the historical continuity of the White House grounds and alter the architectural integrity of the east side of the property.” The NPS environmental assessment, published December 15, concluded that while the project would not have a significant environmental impact, it would create a “visual imbalance” and “adversely alter the design, setting, and feeling of the White House and the grounds over the long term.” The report highlighted the new building’s larger footprint and height, warning it would dominate the eastern portion of the site and create a stark contrast with the more modestly scaled West Wing and Executive Mansion.
Despite these concerns, the NPS also acknowledged that previous administrations had considered adding a permanent, secure event space to the White House grounds, and ultimately found the project did not warrant a full environmental impact statement. The agency’s assessment noted temporary risks, such as noise and vibration, but concluded that the ballroom would meet the functional needs of hosting large events.
The legal battle over the project has been fierce. On December 12, the National Trust for Historic Preservation filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, seeking to “immediately stop” construction until a public review could take place. The suit argued that Trump’s administration had failed to submit plans to the National Capital Planning Commission or Congress, as required by law, and had moved forward with the East Wing demolition without any outside approval. “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 lawsuit reads. “And no president is legally allowed to construct a ballroom on public property without giving the public the opportunity to weigh in.”
In response, the Trump administration claimed in a December 15 court filing that construction was essential for national security reasons, and that the necessary reviews would occur through the appropriate commissions “without this Court’s involvement.” Judge Richard Leon declined to halt construction, but instructed the administration not to finalize plans until another hearing scheduled for January 2026.
Meanwhile, the White House press office has maintained that private donors are footing the bill for the $400 million project. The new ballroom is set to feature an opulent interior reminiscent of Trump’s 2005 Mar-a-Lago addition, which cost $40 million and was modeled after the Hall of Mirrors at Versailles. Expect detailed coffered ceilings, crystal chandeliers, checkerboard flooring, and at least $7 million in gold leafing. The exterior, by contrast, will be “almost identical” to the neoclassical architecture of the White House, with arched windows, a double-height portico, and Corinthian columns, according to official statements.
Trump’s penchant for lavish renovations is well documented. After purchasing Mar-a-Lago in 1985, he oversaw a dramatic update of the historic estate, adding a grand ballroom that became the site of his third wedding to Melania Trump. Now, he is deploying a similar approach in Washington, albeit on a far grander scale and under far greater scrutiny.
Of course, Trump is not the first president to leave his mark on the executive mansion. In 1933, Franklin D. Roosevelt expanded the West Wing and moved the Oval Office. Harry S. Truman gutted the residential portion in the 1940s to install a steel frame and modern amenities. Jacqueline Kennedy led a celebrated restoration in the 1960s, sourcing period furnishings and founding the White House Historical Association. Even the Rose Garden, now partially hardscaped under Trump’s direction, was once redesigned by Bunny Mellon to serve as a formal reception space.
Yet, the scale and style of Trump’s ballroom project have few precedents. The demolition of the East Wing—a structure intertwined with the history of America’s first ladies—has struck a particularly sensitive nerve among historians and the public alike. The White House determined that razing the building and the East Colonnade was more cost-effective and structurally sound than constructing an addition, but that decision remains hotly contested.
Construction is currently underway, with Clark Construction and engineering firm AECOM joining Shalom Baranes Associates on the project team. Despite the ongoing legal and public relations battles, the administration appears determined to press forward, confident that the new ballroom will stand as a signature achievement of Trump’s second term.
As Washington watches the transformation unfold, debate continues about what it means for the White House and the nation’s heritage. Will the new ballroom become a celebrated addition, or a cautionary tale of unchecked ambition? For now, the only certainty is that the East Wing is gone, the cranes are on site, and the future of the White House is being built—one gilded detail at a time.
