A court deadline that could force a halt to construction on President Trump's White House ballroom arrived Friday with the Supreme Court still silent on whether it will let the $400 million project keep going.

A preliminary injunction barring above-ground construction on the 90,000-square-foot ballroom — built on the site of the demolished East Wing — was set to take effect August 21 unless the justices intervened. As of midday Friday, no order had appeared on the Court's docket in the case, though the emergency application has been fully briefed since a reply from the administration was filed Wednesday.

How the case got here

The dispute traces to a lawsuit by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which argues the administration lacks authority to demolish and rebuild the White House complex without congressional approval. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit sided with preservationists 2-1 on August 7, prompting the administration to ask the Supreme Court four days later for an emergency stay.

Solicitor General D. John Sauer told the justices the injunction is "extraordinary and unlawful" and would jeopardize presidential security, noting the project is roughly 65% complete with construction crews working around the clock. Trump's team has also argued the ballroom includes national-security infrastructure, at one point describing it as a "highly integrated military complex." The National Trust, in its opposition filing submitted August 18, countered that the administration is "working around the clock in an attempt to outrace judicial review," and that no president has unilateral power to reshape the White House without Congress signing off.

"Whether or not a massive ballroom should be constructed is for Congress to decide and is not a matter for Executive self-help."

That line comes from the D.C. Circuit's majority opinion. Judge Neomi Rao dissented, warning the lower court had elevated "the aesthetic displeasure of a single passerby over the government's security interests." Several outside groups weighed in on the Supreme Court filing, including members of Congress and the Society for the Rule of Law, whose amicus brief argued the executive branch cannot destroy or transform the White House on its own authority.

The project, funded by private donors rather than taxpayers, has been underway since the East Wing's demolition last October. It has become a flashpoint over how much control a president has over federal property versus how much say Congress and independent commissions retain.

With the injunction's effective date now here and no order from the Court, construction crews and preservationists alike are watching for word from the justices, who can act at any time on the emergency docket without oral argument. A stay would let work continue while the underlying legal fight proceeds in lower courts; a denial would force an immediate stop to above-ground work, though below-ground and security-related construction could continue under the district court's earlier modifications.