Did President Trump have a hand in writing the latest White House East Wing court filing?

Government lawyers for President Trump asked an appeals court late Friday for an emergency ruling to allow construction of the White House East Wing to resume after a lower court judge halted it earlier this week. Part of the legal filing is written in a style typical of President Trump’s social media posts but rarely found in legal documents.

The government argues construction should not be stopped because an unfinished East Wing leaves the president and White House staff potentially vulnerable to “grave national-security harms.”

In making that argument, the government revealed previously unknown security features of the White House addition. It will be built with “missile resistant steel columns” and “drone proof roofing materials,” according to the motion. 

Additionally, the structure will house “bomb shelters, [a] hospital and medical area, protective partitioning, and Top Secret Military installations.” Mr. Trump recently said the 1,000-seat ballroom would act as a “shed” for an underground military bunker.  

The opening pages of the court filing are loaded with exclamation points (“Time is of the essence!”), parenthetical asides, misplaced capital letters (“Almost 400 Million Dollars of private donations”) and multiple adjectives for emphasis (“shocking, unprecedented, and improper injunction”) – all rhetorical flourishes of the president’s online posts. 

One sentence runs 130 words and covers more than half a page.

“Private donors and American Patriots singlehandedly funded the 300 to 400 Million Dollar project (depending on finishes), which is on budget and ahead of schedule. No taxpayer dollars are being used for the funding of this beautiful, desperately needed, and completely secure (for national security purposes) ballroom,” the filing reads. 

Asked whether Mr. Trump had a hand in writing the brief, a White House spokesperson did not respond to two inquiries. Attorneys representing the president did not immediately respond to a request for comment Saturday morning.

The brief’s latter pages present the government’s argument for court action in traditional legalese. 

Last week, federal judge Richard Leon issued a preliminary injunction that stops ballroom construction on April 14th. Leon’s order, which also included a number of exclamation marks, said the government must get congressional approval before continuing the project. 

The injunction allows some work to continue if it was “necessary to ensure the safety and security of the White House.”

The administration immediately appealed the lower court ruling and indicated that the case could be brought to the Supreme Court if construction remains on hold. 

The National Trust for Historic Preservation filed the lawsuit in December. 

In: