Just before midnight on Monday, April 27, 2026, Justice Department leaders filed a nine-page motion asking U.S. District Judge Richard Leon to issue an “indicative ruling” that he would dissolve his injunction against President Trump's planned $400 million White House ballroom. Because the government had appealed the injunction, Leon could only signal how he would rule if the D.C. Circuit sent the case back. The brief was unusual less for what it argued than for how it read.
It opens: “'The National Trust for Historic Preservation' is a beautiful name, but even their name is FAKE ...” It says the Trust's members “suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome, commonly referred to as TDS,” describes the plaintiffs' lawyer, Gregory Craig, as “the lawyer for Barack Hussein Obama,” and calls Trump “a highly successful real estate developer, who has abilities that others don't.” It is full of capitalized words (“STANDING,” “FREE OF CHARGE AS A GIFT TO THE COUNTRY!”) and exclamation points. Politico wrote that its rhetoric and grammar were “ripped straight from Truth Social”; Lawfare noted that the phrase “a woman walking her dog,” used to belittle the Trust's member-plaintiff, had appeared in Trump's Truth Social posts but in none of the department's earlier briefs.
The signature block lists only three names: Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche; Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General R. Trent McCotter; and Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward, the department's third-ranking official, who signed it. Lawfare reported that none of the lawyers listed on the department's earlier briefs in the case appear on this one. No career attorney's name appears on it.
The substantive argument tied the ballroom to the April 25 shooting at the White House Correspondents' Dinner at the Washington Hilton, calling the ballroom and its security facilities “a single integrated, complex unit that is vital for the National Security of the United States” and saying the attack “could have never taken place in the new facility.” Lawfare noted that the planned ballroom would seat about 900 people, while the dinner draws upward of 2,000.
Update (October 2, 2026): The Trust opposed the motion on May 7. On May 14 the same three officials signed a reply brief in the same style, again invoking “Trump Derangement Syndrome,” Above the Law reported. When the motion was filed, the D.C. Circuit had stayed Leon's injunction, so construction was continuing, and it had scheduled oral argument for June 5.
Correction (October 2, 2026): This entry dated the filing to April 28; the court record shows it was filed April 27, the night before Bloomberg Law's report, and the date was changed. It said June 5 was a merits hearing before Judge Leon; it was oral argument at the D.C. Circuit. The title said no career attorneys were involved; the record shows only that none signed, so the title was narrowed. The motion asked for an indicative ruling, not an immediate dissolution, and an unsourced description of how career attorneys draft briefs was removed.