News

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump’s plan for a “Complete Rebuilding” of the Kennedy Center in Washington has sparked a legal debate over whether he — or Congress — has the power to control the high-profile cultural institution.

The battle began in December, when Trump’s name was added to the building’s facade — above the existing signage that reads “The John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts” — following a unanimous vote by Trump’s hand-picked board of center trustees.

It escalated recently, when Trump announced it would close in July for two years — to make major renovations he said were necessary.

Some members of Congress are pushing back, including in court, alleging Trump’s actions are unlawful and should be reversed.

What does the law say?
Here’s a closer look at what the law and history say on the question:

Since Congress created the cultural institution in a federal statute, designating it as a living memorial in 1964 shortly after President John F. Kennedy’s death and then through its expansion in the 2010s, it has been operated by both the executive and legislative branches — contributing to the legal debate.

While the executive branch oversees the appointments of the center’s board of trustees, Congress has the ultimate say on what money gets appropriated and what projects get approved.

The House Appropriations subcommittee overseeing the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies grants the center’s board the power to act on any proposed and approved changes.

According to the top Democrat on the subcommittee, Rep. Chellie Pingree, the panel has historically controlled all funding, project management and security, separate from the executive branch or what is voted on by the center’s trustees.

Congress has proposed and authorized expansive construction projects, such as the REACH expansion adjacent to the Kennedy Center, designed for artist collaboration, to smaller standard year-to-year maintenance costs.

When Trump’s signature legislation passed in July, known as the “One Big Beautiful Bill,” it circumvented the subcommittee, instead directly appropriating $256,657,000 for “necessary expenses for capital repair, restoration, maintenance backlog, and security structures of the building.”

In a statement, the Kennedy Center’s new president, Richard Grenell, a Trump appointee, said, “I am grateful for President Trump’s visionary leadership. I am also grateful to Congress for appropriating an historic $257M to finally address decades of deferred maintenance and repairs at the Trump Kennedy Center.”

The Trump administration has suggested these already appropriated funds will cover any costs of his proposed major renovation.

“It desperately needs this renovation and temporarily closing the center just makes sense — it will enable us to better invest our resources, think bigger and make the historic renovations more comprehensive,” Grenell said. “It also means we will be finished faster.”

Limits on the president’s power?
Georgetown University law professor David Super told ABC News that even though the money for those changes is already appropriated by Congress, Trump and his administration do not have total freedom to make decisions.

“The Constitution says that no money shall be drawn for the Treasury except in accordance with an appropriation passed by Congress,” Super said. “He can spend that money for any of the purposes Congress provided it for, and that includes deferred maintenance, repair, restoration, renovation. It does not allow him to rebuild it.”

While Trump has suggested major renovations, no plans have been officially released or shared with the congressional subcommittee overseeing the center. During an Oval Office photo, Trump said the steel would be “fully exposed” but not removed.

“I’m not ripping it down. I’ll be using the steel,” he said. “So, we’re using the structure. We’re using some of the marble and some of the marble comes down, but when it’s opened, it’ll be brand new and really beautiful. It’ll be at the highest level.”

Super said if those renovations align with the language of the law Congress has passed, it is within Trump’s legal right both as president — and chair of the Kennedy Center’s board — to go forward. If the renovations go beyond what the law spells out and allows, Super said, his moves would be unconstitutional.

“Some of his remarks about ‘maybe, they will use the marble, maybe they won’t’, imply that he’s planning something much more than renovation or repair,” Super said. “If so, then he would be violating the language of the appropriation, and therefore the Constitution.”

When asked whether the president would keep his plan within the constraints laid out by Congress, White House spokeswoman Liz Hudston told ABC News: “While the Democrats neglected the Trump-Kennedy Center for years, President Trump immediately stepped up to rescue and revitalize the institution.”

Hudston also included some intended uses of the funds for maintenance, including “repairing and, where necessary, replacing elements on the exterior of the building,” and “work to bring the Trump-Kennedy Center into compliance with current life safety codes and security standard.”

So far, there are no lawsuits alleging Trump’s proposed renovations to the center are illegal.

The renaming
The center’s controversial renaming presents another legal question.

When the building was designated a living memorial in 1964, Congress wrote in explicit language on how the center should be named and operated.

U.S. Public Law 88-260 dictates the U.S. must “be held to designate or refer to such Center as the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.”

“They really left very little to the imagination, and detailed what they wanted the Kennedy Center to be,” Super said, adding, “there are many things Congress creates that it doesn’t name, and that’s left to the president to name, but here is a law saying it shall be known as the John F Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.”

Super said that regardless of what the board of trustees decides, the name will legally remain as written in the statute.

“And as a duly passed law of Congress, this binds you, it binds me, and it binds the president,” Super said. “The money that the president says he wants to spend on renovating the Kennedy Center is money that was appropriated for the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, not for the Trump-Kennedy Center. So, if he in fact uses that money, he is acknowledging that its name did not change.”

A former Kennedy Center trustee, Democratic Rep. Joyce Beatty, has filed a lawsuit to stop Trump and the board of trustees from changing the Kennedy Center’s name and wants Trump’s name removed.

U.S. Code § 76j states that “the Board shall assure that after December 2, 1983, no additional memorials or plaques in the nature of memorials shall be designated or installed in the public areas of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.”

“Because Congress named the center by statute, changing the Kennedy Center’s name requires an act of Congress,” Beatty’s lawsuit said. “But on December 18 and 19, 2025 — in scenes more reminiscent of authoritarian regimes than the American republic — the sitting President and his handpicked loyalists renamed this storied center after President Trump.”

Pingree said her subcommittee has been told little about Trump’s plans and that she had instead learned about his proposed changes through social media.

“What’s going to happen now?” Pingree told ABC News, adding,” he tore down the East Wing. Does this mean he thinks he’s going to tear down the Kennedy Center and just rebuild it as a monument to himself?”

With lawmakers beginning discussions on funding for 2027, Pingree said she is working with her Republican counterpart to demand information.

“We will certainly say to them, we’re not going to allocate any money in this cycle until you give us more information about what you’re doing,” Pingree said.

“If that money is currently being used just to keep the place afloat because ticket sales are off and performers won’t perform, then it’s not going to go to the desperately needed. I believe there are some really important things that need to be done to that building,” she said.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump on Tuesday posted new renderings of his “Great Ballroom” and said it “will also be used for future Presidential Inaugurations.”

“Two views of the Great Ballroom being built on the site of our wonderful White House — It is on budget, and ahead of schedule!” Trump said of the construction on the former site of the demolished East Wing.

In the social media post, Trump claimed that the new ballroom “will also be used for future Presidential Inaugurations,” because of the ballroom’s expected “unprecedented structural, safety, and security features.”

According to the Library of Congress, the Constitution lays out the language of the inaugural oath but does not dictate where the ceremony must take place. 

The Library of Congress adds that in the 21st century, “inaugurations usually take place on the west front of the U.S. Capitol,” but adds that “there have been many other inauguration sites in the nation’s history.”

Trump initially said in July that the $300 million ballroom project would not interfere with the existing White House structure. Later, when crews began tearing down the East Wing, an official said the “entirety of the East Wing will be modernized” as the massive 90,000 square foot ballroom is built.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation has sued to stop the project.

In January, a federal judge presiding over the challenge signaled doubts about the Trump administration’s argument that the president has the legal authority to undertake the renovations and to fund them with private donations.

That judge said the decision on whether to block Trump’s renovation plans will “hopefully” come this month.

ABC News’ Steven Portnoy and Nathan Lee contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — A top Democrat said Tuesday’s House committee hearing on the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement is the beginning of “accountability” for Department of Homeland Security officials, including Secretary Kristi Noem.

“This hearing is just the start of a reckoning for the Trump administration and its weaponization of DHS against American citizens, and the principle our country stands for. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem must be held accountable for this lawlessness immigration operation,” said Rep. Bennie Thompson, the ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee.

Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons, Customs and Border Protection (CPB) Commissioner Rodney Scott, and Joseph Edlow, director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, are appearing in the first of two hearings on oversight of the two agencies.

Scott highlighted the low border crossing numbers and the work of the men and women of CBP.

“We have now implemented effective policies, established unified priorities and objectives across all federal departments, and empowered our workforce to do their jobs by simply enforcing the laws that already exist,” Scott said.

Lyons pushed back on those who label ICE officers “Gestapo or secret police.”

“I know this first hit firsthand because my own family was targeted, but let me send a message to anyone who thinks they can intimidate us: You will fail,” Lyons said. “Despite these perils, our officers continue to execute their mission with unwavering resolve. We are only getting started. ICE remains committed to the fundamental principles that those who illegally enter our country must be held accountable.”

Lyons said that since the beginning of the second Trump administration, ICE has achieved “historic results.”

“ICE has conducted nearly 379,000 arrests, among those arrests were for more than 7,000 suspected gang members and over 1,400 known or suspected terrorists,” he said.

Lyons declined to apologize to the families of Renee Good and Alex Pretti, who were shot by federal agents in Minneapolis last month, when asked by Rep. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y., to respond to remarks by administration officials calling them domestic terrorists. He instead offered to meet with their families in private.

“I welcome the opportunity to speak to the family in private. But I’m not going to comment on any active investigation.”

Lyons said he wants to release the body-worn camera footage from Minnesota, now that ICE agents are equipped with them.

“That’s one thing that I’m committed to is full transparency,” Lyons said.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick on Tuesday was grilled on Capitol Hill about his past association with Jeffrey Epstein, following revelations that the two men remained in contact years after Lutnick suggested he had distanced himself from the convicted sex offender.

Lutnick strongly denied any wrongdoing, but one Democrat said he had “totally misrepresented” the extent of their relationship “to the Congress, to the American people and to the survivors of his despicable criminal and predatory acts.”

Appearing before a Senate Appropriations subcommittee, Lutnick was asked repeatedly about his correspondence with Epstein detailed in files recently released by the Justice Department, and President Donald Trump’s commerce secretary revealed he visited Epstein’s Caribbean island in 2012 with his family and others.

“I did have lunch with him, as I was on a boat going across on a family vacation. My wife was with me, as were my four children and nannies,” Lutnick testified under questioning by Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland.

Lutnick told Van Hollen that another couple and their children were with them during the visit.

“We had lunch on the island, that is true, for an hour, and we left with all of my children, with my nannies and my wife all together,” he said.

When asked if he saw anything inappropriate during his visit, Lutnick responded, “The only thing I saw with my wife and my children and the other couple and their children was staff who worked for Mr. Epstein on that island.”

Lutnick, who lived next door to Epstein for over a decade, previously suggested he had distanced himself from Epstein back in the mid-2000s prior to Epstein’s conviction in 2008.

“So, I was never in the room with him socially, for business or even philanthropy. If that guy was there, I wasn’t going because he’s gross,” Lutnick said on the “Pod Force One” podcast back in October.

“That’s my story. A one and absolutely done,” Lutnick said.

A spokesperson for the Department of Commerce told ABC News on Monday, “Mr. and Mrs. Lutnick met Jeffrey Epstein in 2005 and had very limited interactions with him over the next 14 years.”

However, the documents released over a week ago showed one email from Epstein’s schedule for May 1, 2011, showing plans for drinks with Lutnick.

Legal documents also showed both Lutnick and Epstein invested in the same business in 2012.

Lutnick testified that he did not have lunch with Epstein in 2011. He also testified that he had no idea about an email from the documents that said Epstein had expressed interest in meeting his nanny.

“I had no idea what that was about. Had nothing to do with me,” he testified.

Van Hollen questioned why Lutnick would make the visit even though Epstein had already been convicted.

“You made a very big point of saying that you sensed that this was a bad person in 2005 and then, of course, in 2008, he was convicted of soliciting prostitution of a minor and yet, you went and had this trip and other interactions,” the senator said.

Lutnick told the committee that he had “nothing to hide, absolutely nothing,” and would speak to the committee about sharing his own records as they relate to Jeffrey Epstein.

“I have done absolutely nothing wrong,” he testified.

Democratic Sen. Chris Coons also criticized Lutnick.

“It troubles me that you took your family to lunch on his island, that you had appointments with him. Please disclose everything. Put this to rest, because this is an issue of grave concern to my constituents,” Coons told Lutnick. “President Trump ran on releasing the Epstein files.”

Lutnick again maintained he had limited interactions with Epstein.

“I did not have anything you could call a relationship, anything you could call an acquaintance,” he told Coons

The White House has defended Lutnick, following the release of the new Epstein files.

“The entire Trump administration, including Secretary Lutnick and the Department of Commerce, remains focused on delivering for the American people,” White House spokesman Kush Desai said in a statement Monday.

Several Democratic lawmakers, however, have called on Lutnick to resign because of his appearance in the files.

“It’s now clear that Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has been lying about his relationship with Epstein. He said he had no interactions with Epstein after 2005, yet we now know they were in business together. Lutnick must resign or be fired,” Rep. Robert Garcia, the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, said in an X post Sunday.

Republican Rep. Thomas Massie also called for Lutnick to resign.

“So, he’s got a lot to answer for. But really, he should make life easier on the president, frankly, and just resign,” Massie told CNN Sunday.

Lutnick did not respond to questions from ABC News prior to the hearing about those calls for him to step down.

House Speaker Mike Johnson voiced confidence in Lutnick, telling reporters Tuesday that bipartisan calls for his resignation are “absurd.”

“Howard Lutnick is a great commerce secretary who’s done an extraordinary job for the country, and Thomas Massie should stop playing political games,” he said.

Reporters pressed the speaker on whether he harbors any concerns about Lutnick given his ties to Epstein.

“I don’t know anything about that. I know Howard as an individual, and I trust his word on it,” Johnson said.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.