2026-07-29T14:05:33.518Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/07/29/politics/trump-eisenhower-executive-office-building-paint-test
保护主义者正试图最早于周四阻止在华盛顿一座标志性建筑上进行涂料涂层测试，他们警告称，这项被宣传为特朗普总统将整座建筑刷成白色的更大规模计划的预测试，将对这座地标建筑造成无法修复的损害。
在拟于周四提交的紧急禁令申请中，文化遗产合作伙伴律师事务所将辩称，拟议的测试——包括在艾森豪威尔行政办公大楼外立面涂刷四块2×2英尺的面板——未经通常要求的专家监督，存在损害建筑的风险。
他们辩称，这还可能开创规避政府审查程序的危险先例，让总统在其他项目上拥有完全自由的权限。
“我认为此事相当紧急，”该事务所创始合伙人格雷格·韦克海瑟说道。“这次测试让我们担忧，因为白宫之外无人知晓谁将开展测试，也不清楚他们遵循何种流程，且合格的保护专家根本没有机会发表意见。”
“全国范围内历史遗迹面临的更广泛担忧是，所有这一切都在总统行政办公室的支持下进行，绕过了国会为这类项目设立的审查程序，”他补充道。
特朗普此前曾表示，希望对艾森豪威尔行政办公大楼进行改造——这座毗邻白宫、规模宏大的镀金时代建筑为约1500名联邦雇员提供办公场所——用白色的“硅酸盐神奇涂料”覆盖其灰色花岗岩外立面。该计划此前因韦克海瑟、其律所及其他保护主义原告提起的法律诉讼而搁置了数月。
上周，政府在一份法庭文件中披露，计划在建筑的隐蔽位置涂刷面板，以测试“涂抹和去除硅酸盐矿物涂层的潜在影响”。
批评者认为，推进涂料测试是特朗普重塑华盛顿、在白宫建筑群留下个人印记的行动升级。
“总统的个人审美偏好不应凌驾于国会规定的程序之上，”这份独家分享给CNN的禁令申请中写道。
“特朗普总统遵循着一套熟悉的套路，”原告方警告道。“他构思一个项目，宣称将改善一处全国民众喜爱且具有历史意义的资源。他指示身边人尽快执行他的设想。他无视国会为保护国家、环境、文化和历史资源制定的严格联邦标准。他就项目将造成的损害以及他正在规避的法律误导公众。随后他仓促推进，对不属于他的资源造成无法挽回的破坏。”
目前尚不清楚负责审理此案的特朗普任命的美国地区法官达布尼·弗里德里希在申请提交后会多快作出回应。
特朗普曾多次贬低这座1888年完工的法国第二帝国风格建筑，称其“丑陋”，将其灰色外立面称为“非常糟糕的颜色”，并声称改用白色外立面将使其与白宫建筑看起来更协调。
为实现这一目标，政府提议要么将艾森豪威尔行政办公大楼整体刷白，要么只涂刷建筑顶部，保留底部原有灰色花岗岩外观。
政府表示计划使用一种硅酸盐矿物涂料——特朗普私下称之为“神奇涂料”——并称该涂料将强化石材、防止渗水。专家对此说法存在争议。
保护主义者认为，艾森豪威尔行政办公大楼宏伟的灰色外立面是该建筑标志性的视觉元素，任何颜色变更都会损害其历史价值，且涂料可能锁住水分，损害花岗岩结构。
去年，他们向华盛顿地区法院提起诉讼，试图阻止粉刷计划。
今年3月，原告方召集了25名未具名的历史建筑修复和硅酸盐涂料领域专家，他们得出结论称“硅酸盐矿物涂料不适用于花岗岩”，并解释称花岗岩无法与这类涂料发生化学结合。他们补充道，对花岗岩进行底漆处理将造成“永久性损害”，且该涂料“既无法强化花岗岩，也无法提升其结构耐久性”。
然而，政府7月20日的最新文件显示，政府将推进涂料测试。
这项测试及潜在翻新工程，将由隶属于总统行政办公室的行政办公室牵头负责，而非由国会授权管理该建筑的总务管理局（GSA）主导。
韦克海瑟辩称，将责任从总务管理局转移到总统办公室，可能使政府规避总务管理局必须遵守的、旨在保护历史建筑的联邦法律和法规中规定的审批和审查流程。
政府在最新的法庭文件中表示，此次测试并不意味着决定推进粉刷项目，他们仍在推进环境和历史保护法律要求的其他分析工作，同时与两个联邦机构——美术委员会和国家首都规划委员会保持沟通，这两个机构对华盛顿公共财产的设计和规划拥有审批权。这两个委员会均由特朗普的忠实支持者组成，必须对该计划签署同意意见。他们已要求提供涂料计划的更多细节。
除涂料研究外，政府还表示将开展外立面状况评估，包括目视和实地勘察，随后从艾森豪威尔行政办公大楼出现损坏的外立面提取最多10个直径2英寸、深度2英寸的样本。
这些样本将在实验室进行测试，以评估石材状况——包括微裂缝、颗粒分离、石材矿物成分、石材状态以及现有涂层、污染物和风化效应的存在情况。
CNN的贝琪·克莱因和德文·科尔对本文亦有贡献。
The Trump admin wants to test paint patches on an iconic DC building this week. Preservationists are trying to stop it.
2026-07-29T14:05:33.518Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/07/29/politics/trump-eisenhower-executive-office-building-paint-test
Preservationists are seeking to stop patches of an iconic Washington building from being painted as soon as on Thursday, warning that the move – billed as a test for President Donald Trump’s larger plan to turn the whole structure white – will cause irreparable damage to the landmark.
In a request for an emergency injunction due to be filed on Thursday, Cultural Heritage Partners, a law firm, will argue that the proposed testing – which includes painting four 2-by-2 foot panels on the façade of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building – without the expert oversight ordinarily required risks harm to the building.
It could also set a dangerous precedent for circumventing government review processes, handing free rein to the president for other projects, they argue.
“I would rate this as pretty urgent,” said Greg Werkheiser, founding partner at the firm. “The testing concerns us because no one outside the White House knows who is conducting the testing or what protocols they’re following, and qualified preservation experts have had no chance to weigh in.”
“The broader concern for historic sites nationwide is that this is all taking place under the auspices of the Executive Office of the President, outside the review process that Congress established for projects like this,” he added.
Trump has expressed his desire to makeover the EEOB – a sprawling Gilded Age structure next to the White House that houses offices for some 1,500 federal employees – by covering its gray granite façade with a white “magic paint with silicate”. The plan had been in a holding pattern for months amid the legal challenge brought by Werkheiser, his firm and other preservationist plaintiffs.
Last week, the administration disclosed in a court filing that it intends to paint panels in inconspicuous spots on the building to test “the potential effects of applying and removing a mineral silicate coating.”
The intention to move forward with the paint test is a step seen by critics as an escalation in Trump’s quest to remake Washington and put his stamp on the White House complex.
“The President’s personal aesthetic preferences do not outweigh congressionally mandated procedures,” the injunction request, shared exclusively with CNN, says.
“President Trump follows a familiar pattern,” the plaintiffs warn. “He conceives of a project that he announces will improve a nationally beloved and historically significant resource. He directs those around him to execute his vision as quickly as possible. He disregards the strict federal standards Congress established to protect national, environmental, cultural, and historic resources. He misleads the public about both the harm his project will cause and the laws he is circumventing. And he rushes forward, irreparably damaging resources that do not belong to him.”
It’s unclear how quickly US District Judge Dabney Friedrich, a Trump appointee who is overseeing the case, will respond to the request once it’s filed.
Trump has repeatedly disparaged the EEOB, which was completed in 1888 in the French Second Empire style, as “ugly,” calling its exterior gray a “really bad color” and asserting that switching to a white façade would give it more of a cohesive look with the White House building.
To achieve that, the administration has proposed either painting the EEOB fully white or painting just the top part of the building while leaving the bottom as the existing gray granite.
It has said it intends to use a mineral silicate paint – which Trump has privately called a “magic paint” – which, it claims, will strengthen the stone and keep water out. That claim is disputed by experts.
Preservationists argue that EEOB’s monumental gray facade is a defining visual element of the building and any change to the color would bring harm to the building’s history, and that the paint could trap moisture that could damage the granite.
Last year, they brought suit to the district court in DC to stop plans to paint it.
And in March, the plaintiffs assembled 25 unnamed experts with experience in historical building restoration and silicate paint, who concluded that “mineral silicate paints are not suited for use on granite,” explaining that the stone does not chemically bond with this type of paint. Priming the granite, they added, would incur “permanent damage,” and the paint would “not strengthen granite or improve its structural durability.”
However, in the latest filing from the government dated July 20, the administration said it would move forward with paint testing.
This and potential renovations, instead of being managed by the General Services Administration (GSA) – an agency with congressionally-mandated authority over the building – a part of the Executive Office of the President called the Office of the Administration would take the lead.
Shifting the responsibility from GSA to the Office of the President could allow the administration to elide the approvals and review process the GSA must adhere to under federal laws and statutes that seek to protect historic property, Werkheiser argues.
The administration, in its latest court filing, says that the testing does not constitute a decision to proceed with the painting project and they remain engaged with other analyses required by environmental and historical preservation laws, as well as with two federal agencies, the Commission of Fine Arts and the National Capital Planning Commission, that have authority over design and planning of public properties in Washington. Both commissions have been stacked with Trump loyalists and would have to sign off on the plans. They have asked for more details about the paint plans.
In addition to painting study, the administration says it will also conduct a facade condition assessment which will include a visual and hands-on survey and then the extraction of up to ten samples of two inches in depth in diameter from the EEOB’s facade that are experiencing deterioration.
The samples will be lab-tested to evaluate the condition of the stone – including microfractures, grain separation, stone mineral composition, stone condition and the presence of preexisting coatings, contaminants and weathering effects.
CNN’s Betsy Klein and Devan Cole contributed to this report
发表回复