By Sunlen Serfaty

Updated 1 hr 46 min ago

Updated Sep 24, 2026, 2:16 PM ET

PUBLISHED Sep 24, 2026, 12:26 PM ET

Donald Trump

See all topics

Facebook TweetEmailLink Threads

Link Copied!

A model of President Donald Trump’s proposed triumphal arch to commemorate the country’s 250th anniversary is displayed at a public meeting of the Commission of Fine Arts at the National Building Museum on April 16 in Washington, DC.

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

The Trump administration has said it will end a key part of a review assessing the impact of the president’s proposed triumphal arch, effectively evading the federal historical preservation law that has been in place since 1966.

The analysis, known as a Section 106 review, usually requires independent groups that have an interest or expertise in historical preservation matters related to a project to sign off.

However, on Thursday, the Advisory Council on Historical Preservation, the federal agency charged with overseeing the review, said it would terminate the consulting process, essentially giving up on reaching an agreement.

In a letter to the Interior department announcing the move, it said it would instead invite the consulting parties to “participate in a meeting with the ACHP to verbally provide their comment” before asking the Interior secretary for “a final decision on the undertaking.”

The change allows President Donald Trump’s arch to bypass a significant hurdle in the approval process for getting built, but is almost certain to launch lawsuits over the legality of ending the review.

It also lays bare the administration’s desire to fast track the project, blowing past objections from experts, legal questions and criticism from the public. The ACHP’s move creates a glidepath to position the arch for final approval in early November.

The letter drew immediate criticism from multiple consulting parties, who told CNN they had not been given sufficient time to evaluate and give input.

“This truly is boundary busting, said Charles Birnbaum of the Cultural Landscape Foundation, a DC-based nonprofit which is among the parties. The administration’s position that “somehow there has been a process is an outright lie,” he said.

The consulting parties – a group of experts, state preservation officers and municipal authorities – were only given two meetings for the Section 106 review, a process that typically plays out over many months for projects of the size and scope of the arch. The most recent meeting, in early September, ended without an agreement as the parties said they needed more information.

Moreover, Trump’s announcement this week that he intends for the arch to double as a “military complex,” represents a significant change in the overall plan for the arch and necessitates more review, Birnbaum added.

Greg Werkheiser, attorney with Cultural Heritage Partners, PLLC, which has been involved in other lawsuits concerning proposed Trump projects, agreed.

“If we believe the president that he is turning his memorial arch into a military installation that stores ammunition and explosives, the Secretary of Interior will be permitting an entirely different project than the one the agencies and the public have been reviewing,” he said. “That’s a clear legal vulnerability.”

Questions over compliance with Section 106 of the National Historical Preservation Act have been at the heart of legal challenges concerning numerous projects Trump has sought to push through, including his proposed construction of a “triumphal arch,” putting his name on the Kennedy Center, the renovation of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool and his proposal to take over the public golf course at East Potomac Park.

The administration has tried to reshape the process by seeking to rewrite its requirements and stacking the ACHP with Trump-aligned members, CNN previously reported.

CNN has asked ACHP and the National Parks Service, to which the letter was addressed, for comment.

The next step now rests with Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, who is expected to receive a request for his approval from the ACHP by October 7. And with his anticipated greenlight, the arch would be up for a final approval before the National Capital Planning Commission, the last step before breaking ground.

This story has been updated with additional information.