What happened
The D.C. Circuit on Wednesday denied President Donald Trump and other appellants' request to stay a district court order requiring his name to be removed from Kennedy Center branding while they appeal.
The per curiam order leaves in place a May 29 district court directive requiring removal of Trump's name from the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts' façade and similar physical signage, deletion of his name from the center's official website title, and withdrawal of trademark applications that included his name as part of the Kennedy Center's appellation.
The panel said the appellants had not met the demanding standard for emergency appellate relief because they had "failed to show how they will be irreparably injured absent a stay." Because that showing was missing, the court said it did not need to address whether the appellants were likely to succeed on the merits.
The timing mattered. The district court had ordered the changes completed by June 12, and the appellants filed their stay motion at 3:46 p.m. that day, along with a request for an immediate administrative stay. The D.C. Circuit denied the administrative stay the same day, and the appellants complied with the district court's order.
The panel rejected the appellants' argument that removing Trump's name caused irreparable harm in wasted expense and time, reasoning that the removal had already happened and a stay would not undo those asserted harms. It also found the appellants' fundraising theory unsupported, saying they had not offered specific facts or evidence showing the Kennedy Center would suffer financial harm if Trump's name was not restored.
The court was similarly unpersuaded by the appellants' argument involving a new entity called The Trump Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts Foundation, which they said could no longer fundraise and would have to return money if the Trump name did not return to the façade. The panel said that contention had not been raised in district court and that the appellants offered no explanation for the omission.
The ruling is narrow but important for the appeal's interim posture: it keeps the district court's branding-related relief in effect while the merits fight continues, without resolving whether the appellants ultimately can overturn the underlying summary judgment order.