2026-08-07 11:19:20 美国东部时间 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻
记者：雅各布·罗森 司法部记者
杰克·罗森负责报道美国司法部。此前他曾是竞选数字记者，报道特朗普总统2024年竞选活动，还曾担任《与玛格丽特·布伦南面对面》节目的助理制片人。
查看完整简历
阿尔登·法希 华盛顿分社执行主编
阿尔登·法希是哥伦比亚广播公司新闻华盛顿分社的执行主编。他曾报道过多场总统竞选活动以及奥巴马、特朗普和拜登政府。他的执行制片人作品包括《与梅杰·加勒特一起外卖》以及哥伦比亚广播公司新闻原创播客《背叛特工》，其作品曾获两项艾美奖、一项杜邦奖和纽约节金奖。
查看完整简历
华盛顿讯——联邦上诉法院周五裁定，特朗普政府无权单方面在东翼旧址上新建一座占地9万平方英尺的宴会厅，认定这项耗资4亿美元的工程需要国会批准。
在一份2比1的裁决中，华盛顿特区的一个联邦上诉合议庭支持下级法院的判决，认定白宫“极有可能”无权拆除并重建东翼。法官们表示，国会“对联邦财产及其维护和发展资金拥有完整的宪法控制权”，并指出“没有任何明示或默示的授权”赋予特朗普总统修建宴会厅的权力。
“每位总统都是白宫及其行政官邸的临时租户，而非所有者。总统对该财产没有——也声称没有——宪法赋予的管理权，该财产的设计和维护是为了供历任现任和未来总统以及美国人民使用，”法官们在判决意见中写道。
“我们在美国历史上从未见过有总统单方面动用私人募集资金拆除国会批准建造、美国纳税人出资修建的白宫重要区域，”法官们说，“直到现在。”
法官帕特里夏·米利特和布拉德利·加西亚撰写了多数意见。由特朗普提名担任联邦法官的妮奥米·拉奥提出了异议。米利特和加西亚分别由巴拉克·奥巴马总统和乔·拜登总统提名。
法官们将判决暂缓执行14天，给政府留出上诉机会。司法部可以请求全体上诉法院审理此案，也可以直接向最高法院提起上诉。
“这一裁决与拟议的宴会厅是否符合政策考量毫无关系，”多数意见写道，“这一裁决甚至不一定意味着被告最终无法修建这座宴会厅。它的意义在于，在地区法院的快速诉讼程序结束前，被告必须获得国会授权，才能按照宪法和法律的要求开展施工。”
在异议意见中，拉奥写道，最初提起诉讼阻止特朗普项目的美国国家历史保护信托基金不具备合法的诉讼资格。拉奥指责最初叫停施工的下级法院法官及其同事“司法越权”。
白宫和司法部没有立即回应置评请求。
关于宴会厅的法律之争
今年3月，美国地区法官理查德·里昂裁定，一个保护组织提起的法律挑战极有可能在实质问题上胜诉，该组织起诉阻止特朗普的施工项目，理由是“政府用来为施工辩护的任何法规都远未赋予总统所声称的权力”。特朗普已于去年10月拆除东翼，并在未经国会批准的情况下开始施工。
政府在法庭文件中辩称，一项允许白宫对行政官邸进行日常维护和修缮的法规为该项目提供了法律依据。代理司法部长托德·布兰奇还在法庭文件中主张，合议庭应当下令恢复施工，因为今年4月白宫记者协会晚宴上的未遂袭击凸显了在白宫园区修建安全宴会厅的必要性。
特朗普政府对最初的裁决提起上诉后，上诉法官下令里昂重新考虑叫停施工可能带来的国家安全影响。几周后，他修改了裁决，认定东翼的地上施工必须停止，但总统地堡的地下施工可以继续。
今年4月，合议庭批准了司法部提出的行政暂缓请求，允许所有白宫宴会厅施工继续进行，同时法院审理相关诉状并于上月听取了口头辩论。
美国国家历史保护信托基金于去年年底起诉政府，指控其在拆除东翼并动工修建宴会厅之前未遵守联邦指南。该信托基金还对这座耗资4亿美元项目的资金来源提出质疑，特朗普称该项目的资金主要来自私人捐款。
特朗普去年夏天宣布该项目后，宴会厅项目迅速推进。一个由特朗普盟友组成的美国美术委员会小组于今年2月全票通过了宴会厅提案。美国国家公园管理局表示，施工有望在2028年年中完成。
该项目遭到国会民主党人和保护组织的密切关注，他们认为特朗普政府在未充分征求公众意见的情况下对白宫进行重大改造。政府为该项目辩护，称其是白宫建筑群的有益补充，属于白宫长期改造序列的一部分。
特朗普对华盛顿特区的宏大重塑计划
https://www.cbsnews.com/video/trumps-monumental-reimagining-of-washington-d-c/
特朗普对华盛顿特区的宏大重塑计划
(时长09:39)
Appeals court says Trump lacks authority to build White House ballroom without approval from Congress
2026-08-07 11:19:20 EDT / CBS News
By Jacob Rosen Justice Department Reporter
Jake Rosen is a reporter covering the Department of Justice. He was previously a campaign digital reporter covering President Trump’s 2024 campaign and also served as an associate producer for “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan.”
Read Full Bio
Arden Farhi Washington bureau managing editor
Arden Farhi is the managing editor for CBS News’ Washington bureau. He has covered several presidential campaigns and the Obama, Trump and Biden administrations. His executive producer credits include “The Takeout with Major Garrett” and the CBS News original podcast “Agent of Betrayal,” and his work has been recognized with two Emmy Awards, a DuPont Award and a NY Festivals gold medal.
Read Full Bio
Washington— A federal appeals court on Friday said the Trump White House lacks the authority to unilaterally construct a new 90,000-square-foot ballroom where the East Wing once stood, finding that the $400 million project requires congressional approval.
In a 2-1 decision, a federal appellate panel in D.C. sided with a lower court in ruling that the White House “very likely” lacked authority to demolish and rebuild the East Wing. The judges said Congress has “full constitutional control over federal property and the funding of its maintenance and development,” and noted an “absence of any express or implied authorization” that grants President Trump the ability to construct the ballroom.
“Each President is a temporary tenant, not the owner, of the White House and its Executive Residence. The President has no — and claims no — constitutionally assigned authority over that property, which is designed and maintained for the use of all Presidents, current and future, and for the American people,” the judges wrote in their opinion.
“We are aware of no instance in American history in which a President unilaterally and using privately collected funds demolished substantial portions of the White House that Congress authorized to be built and American taxpayers paid for,” the judges said. “Until now.”
Construction continues on the East Wing ballroom project at the White House on Aug. 6, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Kevin Carter / Getty Images
Judges Patricia Millett and Bradley Garcia wrote the majority opinion. Judge Neomi Rao, who was nominated to the federal bench by Mr. Trump, dissented. Millett and Garcia were nominated by Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden, respectively.
The judges stayed their decision for 14 days to give the government the chance to appeal. The Justice Department could ask the full appeals court to hear the case or appeal to the Supreme Court directly.
“This holding has nothing at all to do with whether the proposed ballroom is desirable, or not, as a matter of policy,” the majority wrote. “This ruling does not even necessarily mean that the Defendants may not ultimately construct the ballroom. What it does mean is that the Defendants may not do so during the district court’s expeditious litigation without securing Congress’s authorization, as the Constitution and laws require.”
In her dissent, Rao wrote that the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which sued in lower court to block Mr. Trump’s project, did not have proper legal standing to bring the lawsuit. Rao accused the lower court judge that initially blocked the construction, and her colleagues, of “judicial overreach.”
The White House and Justice Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The legal battle over the ballroom
In March, U.S. District Judge Richard Leon ruled that a legal challenge brought by a preservation group that sued to block Mr. Trump’s construction project was likely to succeed on the merits, because “no statute” that the government used to justify the construction “comes close to giving the President the authority he claims to have.” Mr. Trump tore down the East Wing last October and began construction without congressional approval.
The administration contended in court filings that a statute permitting the White House to perform routine maintenance and repairs to the executive mansion provides a legal justification for the project. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche also argued in court filings that the panel should order the resumption of construction because the recent attempted attack at the White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner in April underscored the need for a secure ballroom on White House grounds.
After the Trump administration appealed the initial ruling, the appellate judges ordered Leon to reconsider the possible national security implications of halting the construction. Weeks later, he amended his ruling, finding that above-ground work on the East Wing must stop, but underground construction on a presidential bunker could continue.
In April, the panel granted an administrative stay sought by the Justice Department that allowed all White House ballroom construction to continue while the court considered briefs and heard arguments last month.
The National Trust for Historic Preservation in the U.S. sued the administration late last year for allegedly failing to adhere to federal guidelines prior to demolishing the East Wing and breaking ground on a ballroom. The Trust also questioned the $400 million project’s funding mechanism, which the president claims is largely from private donations.
The ballroom project came together quickly after Mr. Trump announced it last summer. A panel of the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, filled with the president’s allies, voted unanimously to approve the ballroom proposal in February. The National Park Service has said construction could wrap up by mid-2028.
The project has drawn scrutiny from congressional Democrats and preservation groups who argue that the Trump administration was making major changes to the White House without enough public input. The administration has defended the project, casting it as a useful addition to the complex and part of a long line of alterations to the White House.
Trump’s monumental reimagining of Washington, D.C.
https://www.cbsnews.com/video/trumps-monumental-reimagining-of-washington-d-c/
Trump’s monumental reimagining of Washington, D.C.
(09:39)
发表回复