Somehow Chief Justice John Roberts found that a single person who walks past the White House every month and doesn’t like the proposed appearance of the ballroom has some standing to sue and block construction. Go figure. Roberts also decided that the Obamacare mandate wasn’t a tax.
Roberts joined with the minority DEI judges in his position [RULING HERE]. However, the majority decision was against the woman having standing to sue. Therefore, the lawsuit was dispatched and the building can continue.
SCOTUS BLOG – […] On Monday, a divided court granted the government’s request for a stay, permitting construction to move forward while the litigation continues in the lower court. The majority’s opinion focused primarily on its conclusion that the National Trust likely does not have standing to challenge the project. The trust had submitted a declaration from Alison Hoagland, a member who lives in Washington, D.C., and said that she visits the area where the White House is located approximately once per month. Hoagland, who has “expertise in historic architecture,” claimed that the project caused “‘injuries’ to her ‘aesthetic, cultural, and historical interests’ because she finds the ‘scale,’ ‘height,’ and ‘massing’ of the government’s design distasteful.” But those are not the kind of “concrete” and specific injuries required to bring a lawsuit, the majority explained.
The majority also concluded that the government would be permanently harmed if Leon’s order were allowed to go into effect – another key criterion in determining whether to grant emergency relief. Among other things, it noted, senior government officials “attest[] that constructing something approximating the height and mass of the intended above-ground ballroom is ‘crucial’ to the security of the below-ground military installation.”
In his six-page dissent, which Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson joined, Roberts countered that “[a] historic preservationist such as Hoagland can be aesthetically injured in a concrete, particularized way by the transformation of a historic building that she frequently enjoys, just as,” based on prior court precedent, “an environmentalist can sustain a concrete, particularized aesthetic injury from the extinction of a particular animal or the transformation of a particular forest or river that he regularly enjoys.” Roberts ended the opinion by quoting Winston Churchill, who said that “[w]e shape our buildings, and afterwards our buildings shape us.” “All the more reason,” according to Roberts, “to ensure that those responsible follow the rules in deciding what to tear down and what to build up at the People’s House.” (source)
President Trump – “I am pleased to report that the United States Supreme Court has just ruled in favor of the Ballroom/Military Complex being built without any further contingency, doubt, or threat. We are living in the Golden Age of America, and this Building will be one of the Greatest ever constructed in Washington, D.C. When completed in the Summer of 2028, the magnificent Ballroom and Military Complex will be something that the entire Country is very proud of. The Project, despite the baseless lawsuit brought by the so-called National Trust for Historic Preservation of the United States, which is not in any way affiliated with the United States Government, is under budget and ahead of schedule. The Ballroom is totally funded by Great Patriots and Corporations and, therefore, is a Gift — At no cost to the American Taxpayer. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”


Let’s play Roberts mad libs!
“While ______ has the right to ______, he did not provide the court with a sufficient justification.”
(From the census decision in Trump 1.0)
When the hell is the Devil going to take Roberts home?
Getting permission from the three-name women on the court.
The bum needs to go. Not soon enough.
An illegitimate court full of f*ing cowards.
Because we’ve legitimized communist-based parties to run national candidates we are stuck with the d-heads in these many courts.
“You have to be standing to be able to walk past the White House therefore she indeed has standing” Ketanji Brown Jackson………
No she didn’t say that but I bet she thought it.
🦨
That sounds like the Hank “Guam” Johnson school of thought. The ballroom may tip over if you put too many people in it.
She probably did say it – but the slightly smarter ones edited out on her behalf.
I’m glad that Trump seems to understand that discretion is the better part of valor.
Calling Roberts a sh*thead right now would probably not be a good idea.
He has more battles to fight before that court.
Welp, I’ll just do it for him! …”Justice Roberts is a sh*thead”!!! 😉
Tempting though that would be—for me at least!
Roberts: “It is likely that the construction is illegal.”
“LIKELY”???!!!
But he cannot be sure, therefore, rather than allowing it to continue, which is what Logic requires in the case of doubt, he will vote to shut it down, although it could be legal!
It is likely that the man is dead, so go ahead and bury him!
we did that during covid with nursing homes and hostels
Perfect! On point!!!
I wonder what is illegal about it? Construction projects on the White House have been undertaken many times by other presidents. What’s different this time (I mean, other than TDS)?
But John Roberts will maintain that I don’t have standing to sue states that allow illegal voters to dilute my vote in federal elections. As I think Sundance had written before, the issue of “standing” had recently been redefined to give judges a way to refuse to rule on controversial topics. In other words, judicial weaponization.
Emperor Roberts is clearly complicit in the lawfare of the communist left.
He also clearly relishes rubbing that affiliation in the faces of the citizenry.
May he land squarely in the center of the dungheap of his making.
He’s GWB’s middle finger to his once-supportive base.
regarding robert’s interpretation of standing
“Roberts ended the opinion by quoting Winston Churchill, who said that “[w]e shape our buildings, and afterwards our buildings shape us.” “All the more reason,” according to Roberts, “to ensure that those responsible follow the rules in deciding what to tear down and what to build up at the People’s House”
what was the arugment against standing>…
Her lawsuit wouldn’t have made it this far in a sane world.
I still have trouble understanding why a judge can sit on the SC and not be able to know what a woman is. What else does she not know? Why put such a person on the highest court in the land?
And why does Roberts think anyone has standing to sue over a building that hasn’t been built? If the building hasn’t been built, how has she been “damaged” in any way?
The USSC has been on our side 95% of the time. The ones we lost could be fixed in ten minutes by attaching a few paragraphs in the NDAA.
Why has NO ONE released whatever dirt is being used to make John Roberts look like an idiot and a fool? He should resign in shame but has probably been told not to do so, because TPTB like him where he is, and enjoy randomly yanking his chain to force him to embarrass himself by joining ridiculous opinions…
🎯
Can I now sue to have that ugly brutalist FBI building torn down because it is offensive to my sensibilities?
My understanding from back in 2012 was that Roberts joined the liberal judges in holding that the Obamacare individual mandate was a constitutionally permissible tax. No?
Retired Magistrate here: I don’t think Chief Justice Roberts has standing to rule on anything!
From your lips to God’s ears.
Always the same 4 pussies voting in unison.
What law grants privilege to those with “expertise in historic architecture” to claim harm by being offended at buildings under construction? Does Roberts think that a certain presidential library in Chicago would somehow escape his strict scrutiny of what is distasteful?
Amen to that.
There is a dirty, powerful, ongoing connection to Roberts. And it is not his childrens adoption. It is much more powerful than that
We have to find and expose it.
why did he adopt.. was he to old, impotent.. his wife couldnt have kids, what was it
Look at that SCOTUS pic. It really peeves me when people complain and boo-hoo about race/gender suffrage in this country. All of them are sad sacks of doo except for Thomas.
ah, Alison Hoagland, the once a month dog walker
whose delicate sensibilities are offended by classical architecture.
whaddya wanna bet she doesn’t pick up her dog poop?
i’d like to see this go to the Supremes:
District of Columbia v. Alison Hoagland, Defendant. 🤣
Roberts hoped “I’m so scary, Barrett” would follow him. lol, I told you before that John Robert is behind all the lawfare. How many judges have been removed? NONE
Possibly. This Reason essay argues that Roberts’ opinions (which reads more like a majority than a dissent) was written to get Barrett’s vote. But he couldn’t get it.
https://reason.com/volokh/2026/08/31/making-sense-of-the-chief-justices-tango-in-the-ballroom-case/
Interesting tidbit is that Roberts kept trying to get Barrett to switch her Dobbs vote right up to the release of the opinion. I’d bet he had his “majority” opinion sitting in a drawer. He also allegedly tried to get Kennedy to switch on Obamacare, to make the vote 6-3 instead of 5-4, but Kennedy wouldn’t flip.
Roberts like to hide in a 6-3 majority . He doesn’t like being the swing vote. He’ll join in the majority at times because he gets to choose the opinion writer when he’s in the majority, by virtue of being chief.
Somebody owns Roberts.
His Obamacare ruling that a fine was a tax NEVER made sense.
Now his ruling that a person passing by a building has “standing” to object to its construction is bonkers.
Congress is probably the only one with standing. It would argue that Trump needed congressional approval, and didn’t get it.
I suffer “aesthetic injury” at the sight of Roberts and the 3-witches, knowing they are defacing the Constitution in everything they do.
Roberts continues to be an utter disappointment as Chief Justice.
The more I see Chief Justice Roberts and the results of his “garbage” votes, opinions, and rulings … the more I suspect he is, in fact, a DEI woman …
Another result ??? The more I like dogs … go figure.
When the ballroom is finished don’t let Roberts in. He can stand in a tent outside with a Porta Potty nearby just like they had before.
Clarence Thomas played the long game.
https://www.frontpagemag.com/clarence-thomas-played-the-long-game/?utm_source=FrontPage+Magazine&utm_campaign=06c0317983-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2026_08_31_03_36&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_57e32c1dad-06c0317983-520587302&mc_cid=06c0317983
Where were they when prior presidents remade the White House? Just more “trumped” up crap.
I really wonder how badly Roberts is compromised? It must be pretty bad considering some of his decisions.