Leon's clarification came after the government argued that the entire ballroom project fell within a safety-and-security exception he built into his March 31 injunction. "Defendants now seek to turn this exception on its head and unreasonably insist that the entire ballroom project may proceed," Leon wrote. "Based on the record before me, I cannot possibly agree."
The D.C. Circuit on April 11 remanded the case "with instructions to promptly address the pending motion to clarify how the injunction and its exception ensure safety and security pending litigation," and extended a temporary stay of the injunction.
Leon said the government's position conflicted with its earlier representations in the case. Defendants previously argued that "the below-surface work is driven by national security concerns independent of the above-grade construction," and that below-ground elements do not "lock in" the design of the above-ground ballroom.
In opposing the National Trust's clarification motion, the government asserted that security-related elements including "missile-resistant steel columns and beams, drone-proof roofing, and bullet- and blast-proof glass windows" would "advance safety and security interests as part of an inseparable whole." A Secret Service declaration from Deputy Director Matthew C. Quinn stated that below-ground construction had "been done with th[e] expectation of what would go above," and that the "project is a single, coherent whole."
Leon rejected that framing. "It is, to say the least, incredible, if not disingenuous, that Defendants now argue that my Order does not stop ballroom construction because of the safety-and-security exception," he wrote. He noted that the government acknowledged "the project is expected to take another two years until completion," undercutting claims that the security features must be installed immediately.
The amended order permits below-ground construction of "top-secret excavations, bunkers, bomb-shelters, protective partitioning, military installations, and hospital and medical facilities," along with above-ground work "strictly necessary to cover, secure, and protect such facilities." It also allows waterproofing, water management, and measures addressing "uncovered rebar and exposed cables around the site."
Leon reviewed four classified ex parte declarations submitted by the government but said they "shed no further light on the question of whether the above-ground ballroom is necessary for national security." He wrote that "national security is not a blank check to proceed with otherwise unlawful activity."
Leon extended the temporary stay of the injunction by seven days from the issuance of the opinion. He warned that "any above-ground construction over the next seven days that is not in compliance with my Amended Order is at risk of being taken down pending the resolution of this case."
"I have no desire or intention to be dragooned into the role of construction manager," Leon wrote. "The purpose of this opinion is merely to clarify that the injunction does, in fact, stop construction of the above-ground ballroom."
The National Trust's motion to clarify was granted. The government's motion to extend the administrative stay was granted in part and denied in part. An appeal is pending before the D.C. Circuit in No. 26-5101.