The East Wing of the White House is set to be demolished within days, marking a major expansion of President Donald Trump’s ballroom construction project, according to two administration officials.
The move comes months after Trump claimed the project would not affect the existing structure. “It won’t interfere with the current building,” he said on July 31. “It’ll be near it, not touching it, and will fully respect the historic design—which I deeply admire.”
However, reports from The New York Times and NBC News reveal that the demolition now includes the entire East Wing, a structure built in 1942 during Franklin D. Roosevelt’s presidency. The wing traditionally houses the First Lady’s offices and staff.
A “Modernized and Rebuilt” East Wing
A White House official told NBC News that the East Wing will be completely modernized and rebuilt, though plans remain “fluid.”
“The scope and size of the ballroom project have always been subject to change as development progresses,” the official said.
Trump began construction on the ballroom last month, describing it as a 900-capacity event space. Initially estimated at $250 million, Trump later said the cost had risen to $300 million, which he claims will be covered by himself and private donors.
Preserving History Amid Controversy
Officials confirmed that historical elements from the East Wing — including items from Rosalynn Carter’s Office of the First Lady — have been preserved and stored under the supervision of the White House Executive Residence, the National Park Service, and the White House Historical Association.
Still, the National Trust for Historic Preservation has voiced strong opposition, warning in a letter that the ballroom’s size could “overwhelm the White House itself.”
“We urge the administration to pause demolition until plans undergo proper public review,” said Carol Quillen, the Trust’s CEO.
Regulatory Oversight and Legal Concerns
Typically, such a large-scale project would be reviewed by agencies including the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC), and the D.C. State Historic Preservation Office. However, the White House — as federal property and a national symbol — is largely exempt from binding regulatory authority.
Administration officials argue they haven’t violated procedure since only demolition — not construction — has begun. A White House representative said plans will be submitted “soon when it is time,” though no specific timeline has been provided.
Public Reaction and Growing Criticism
The East Wing’s facade was torn down this week, sparking outrage from Democrats, historians, and some Republicans. Critics accused the administration of bypassing transparency and disrespecting the building’s historical integrity.
Architectural historian Bryan Clark Green said that previous administrations have always sought public review before major White House changes.
“Trump said it wouldn’t affect the East Wing, but clearly it has,” Green remarked. “A public process would have prevented this surprise.”
Meanwhile, Priya Jain of the Society of Architectural Historians emphasized that “demolition normally comes after public deliberation, not before.”
White House Pushes Back
In a statement Tuesday, the White House dismissed criticism as “manufactured outrage” from “unhinged leftists and Fake News allies.”
The release described the ballroom as a “visionary and privately funded addition” that continues a long tradition of presidential renovations.
“For over a century, U.S. presidents have expanded and modernized the White House to meet the needs of their era,” the statement read.
Donors and Project Oversight
The Trust for the National Mall is overseeing private donations, with Trump personally directing the project alongside McCrery Architects. Major donors reportedly include Comcast Corp. (the parent of NBCUniversal) and Alphabet, which agreed to contribute $22 million as part of a legal settlement with Trump.
Last week, Trump hosted a private dinner at the White House to thank donors for their support.
While demolition progresses rapidly, questions remain over transparency, cost, and the impact on one of America’s most historic landmarks.