A group of Vietnam War veterans and an architectural historian on Friday asked Judge Tanya Chutkan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to block the Trump administration's plans for a triumphal arch. The plaintiffs filed a request for a temporary restraining order to halt construction before it begins.
Interior Secretary Doug Burgum announced Thursday that the administration would break ground on the project despite an ongoing lawsuit. The proposed 250-foot arch, also called the "Independence Arch" or "Great Triumphal Arch," is planned near Arlington National Cemetery.
The plaintiffs—Michael Lemmon, Shaun Byrnes, Jon Gundersen, and architectural historian Calder Loth—argue the administration's course of action violates federal law. They contend the construction would disrupt views between Arlington National Cemetery and the Lincoln Memorial.
Their legal challenge cites federal statutes that prohibit buildings on federal land in D.C. without federal approval and require Congress to authorize construction in the area where Trump wants the arch.
Judge Chutkan previously issued an order in April stating the administration could not break ground without first providing two weeks' notice on its website and to the court. The administration has not provided this notice. During a hearing that month, Chutkan said: "What I do not want is for ground to be broken while this case is pending."
The Trump administration, through Interior Secretary Burgum and the Justice Department, argues that Congress already authorized the arch in the early 1900s—a position that conflicts with more restrictive statutes lawmakers implemented later.
The Justice Department told the court Thursday that the veterans' case should be dismissed. It cited the Supreme Court's decision to throw out a previous case against Trump's ballroom construction, where five Republican justices determined the plaintiffs lacked legal standing to sue.
A key difference: the arch plaintiffs sued before construction began, while the lawsuit over the White House ballroom followed Trump's demolition of the East Wing after the fact.
Plaintiffs told Judge Chutkan on Friday that the government should not "blaze ahead with an unlawful course of conduct in the hope that they can render the arch a fait accompli before this Court has had the chance to reach a final determination."
Congressional sentiment does not favor such a project. Senate Republicans rejected funding for the White House ballroom earlier this year, signaling little appetite for similar construction initiatives.
