Legality of Trump's $400M in private funding for White House ballroom at issue

[pat_k]

2. I don't see why there is even a question.

AI (Gemini appears to agree). The White House is covered by the Property Clause of the Constitution. Congressional approval is required. Congressional authority over the disposition has nothing to do with the source of funds.

Demolishing the East Wing without Congressional approval was as much a violation as bombing Old Faithful in Yellowstone National Park would be.

Yes, the White House is considered federal property owned by the American people and managed by the National Park Service, bringing it under the jurisdiction of the Property Clause (Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2) of the U.S. Constitution. This clause gives Congress authority over federal property, requiring congressional approval for major changes or renovations.

Key details regarding the White House as federal property:

Congressional Control: Major renovations, such as the Truman-era reconstruction, require congressional approval and funding.
Public Property: The White House is considered part of the "Executive Residence," which contains public property, including furniture and items managed by the National Park Service.

Legal Standing: The National Trust for Historic Preservation has previously argued that significant alterations to the White House without proper review violate the Property Clause.

Management: While it is the President's residence, it is officially managed as a unit of the National Park Service.
As such, the President cannot legally treat the White House as private property and is subject to federal laws regarding its preservation and management.