US President Donald Trump has announced plans to demolish the existing structure of the White House East Wing to make way for a new $250 million (£186 million) ballroom, a project that has sparked controversy and raised concerns about transparency and historic preservation. Demolition work began on Monday, with administration officials indicating that the entire East Wing would be torn down by the weekend. This marks a significant expansion of a construction project initially announced over the summer, when Trump had stated that the ballroom addition would not interfere with the current building.
The East Wing of the White House, constructed in 1902 and last modified in 1942, is a historic and functional part of the presidential residence. It houses offices for the first lady and other staff, as well as spaces for meetings and special events. Trump has described the building as having undergone numerous changes over the years, asserting that it was "very, very much changed from what it was originally" and that the modifications have been desired "for at least 150 years." He emphasized that the East Wing was "never thought of as being much" and suggested that the current construction is long overdue.
According to the president, the ballroom project is being fully funded by himself and "some friends of mine – donors," with involvement from the military. Trump announced the start of construction in a social media post on Monday, declaring that "ground has been broken" on the "much-needed" ballroom space. He also maintained that the East Wing is "completely separate" from the main White House building, despite being physically attached.
Administration officials told CBS News, the BBC’s US partner, that the East Wing required modernization to improve security and technology. During the planning process, it became clear that the best course of action was to demolish the entire wing rather than merely renovate it. Trump rejected accusations of a lack of transparency about the scale of the works, insisting to reporters that "we've been more transparent than anyone's ever been."
Despite these claims, criticism from opposition politicians and preservationists has intensified as the full scope of the project has become clearer. Democratic members of the US House of Representatives have written to the president, voicing concerns about transparency and requesting a range of documents related to the demolition and construction plans. One prominent critic, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, took to social media to condemn the project, stating, “The White House is not Trump’s house, and he’s destroying it.”
Conservationists and heritage experts have also raised alarms, suggesting that the project should have undergone more rigorous scrutiny before proceeding. The White House, as a symbol of American history and governance, is generally considered a special case in terms of preservation. It is exempt from the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, which ordinarily requires public reviews for projects affecting historic buildings. However, some experts believe that the White House has historically followed similar preservation protocols out of respect and best practice.
Professor Priya Jain, chair of a heritage preservation committee at the Society of Architectural Historians, told the BBC that she would be surprised if such a process had not been followed in the past. She explained that the established review procedures are widely applied and considered best practice, especially for buildings of significant historical importance. The lack of a formal public review for this project has therefore been a point of contention.
The National Trust for Historic Preservation, a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting historic sites across the United States, has expressed its "deep concern" about the demolition. The trust sent a letter to White House officials urging them to pause the demolition work, emphasizing the White House’s status as a national historic landmark. The organization called for a public review process to assess the implications of the ballroom construction project.
The controversy surrounding the East Wing project highlights the tension between modernization needs and heritage conservation. While the Trump administration argues that the construction is necessary to update security and technological capabilities, critics worry about the impact on the historic fabric of one of America’s most iconic buildings. The cost of the project, at a quarter of a billion dollars, has also raised eyebrows among opponents who question the necessity and timing of such an expensive undertaking.
The East Wing itself has long been a vital part of the White House complex. Built in the early 20th century, it has served as office space for the first lady and her staff, hosting various functions and meetings. The last major modifications to the East Wing were made during World War II, in 1942, indicating that the structure has stood largely unchanged