Judge asks if Trump’s desire to rush triumphal arch in DC is to ‘bedazzle the city’

US Commission of Fine Arts

A federal judge on Friday was skeptical of the Trump administration’s urgency to rush construction of a controversial 250-foot triumphal arch that the president wants to begin next week.

Judge Tanya Chutkan asked an administration attorney, “What’s the harm to the government to wait 3 or 4 months? What’s the rush to put this arch up?,” asking if the president’s main desire is to “bedazzle the city.”

Originally proposed as a monument for the country’s 250th birthday, the Trump administration now argues the arch located in a traffic circle would serve both a tourist attraction and a military complex to store drones and ammunition.

Chutkan noted that while Trump has been espousing these military justification claims on social media for months, in their lawsuits the “government had appeared to back away from that position.” The Obama nominee implied the Justice Department was “coincidentally” including national security interests in their argument now after the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the White House ballroom in August on similar grounds.

Judge tears into senior DOJ official and orders investigation into Trump’s golf course plans

“We’re not talking about plans for a cafeteria, how exactly does the administration plan to use this for national security?” Chutkan pressed the Justice Department attorney Robert Stander.

In response, Stander referenced repeated attempts on Trump’s life, to which Chutkan countered, “The arch is somehow supposed to deter assassination attempts on the president? It’s going to be completed 3years from now.”

She also raised concerns with installing military equipment in an area the DOJ says will attract up to 22,000 civilian tourists a day.

The Justice Department argued that the challengers lacked standing, since the plans will not be finalized until next week’s National Capitol Planning Commission meeting. However, the administration previously said that construction could begin that same day upon approval. Chutkan pointed out that following this logic, plaintiffs would only have one day to bring forward a lawsuit.

“What would be final agency action,” she asked, “when bulldozers start digging up the ground?”

The group of veterans suing the administration requested an emergency court order to immediately halt construction of the arch, arguing it would undermine the sanctity of burial sites at Arlington National Cemetery. The proposed arch would obstruct the clear sightline of the row of national landmarks from the Lincoln Memorial to Arlington National Cemetery. Several of the veterans spoke in court Friday.

Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images

A ‘generational defense opportunity’: Hegseth offers full-throated endorsement of Trump’s arch amid legal battle

Chutkan told the plaintiffs she was not interested in any “distaste and disgust against the administration” but instead in how their personal experiences would be impacted by the looming arch.

She also appeared favorable to the argument that the veterans had more to lose than the plaintiff in the ballroom case who had cited aesthetic concerns, since they are active participants at Arlington National Cemetery, and the arch construction has not yet begun.

“The area is still pristine, the view is unobstructed, so why isn’t this case more like the golf course case?” Chutkan asked.

Trump’s arch faces another lawsuit from a county board in Virginia, so any future ruling from Chutkan will not be the end of the project’s legal challenges.

美国美术委员会

周五，一位联邦法官对特朗普政府急于建造备受争议的 250 英尺高的凯旋门表示怀疑，总统希望下周开始建造这座凯旋门。

法官塔尼亚·楚特坎问一位政府律师：“等上三四个月对政府有什么害处？为什么要急着把这座拱门建起来？”她还问总统的主要目的是不是“让这座城市眼花缭乱”。

最初提议建造这座拱门是为了纪念美国建国 250 周年，但特朗普政府现在认为，这座位于环岛的拱门既可以作为旅游景点，也可以作为存放无人机和弹药的军事设施。

楚特坎指出，虽然特朗普几个月来一直在社交媒体上宣扬这些军事理由，但在诉讼中，“政府似乎已经放弃了这一立场”。这位奥巴马提名的法官暗示，司法部现在“巧合地”将国家安全利益纳入其论点，是因为最高法院在8月份以类似理由裁定白宫宴会厅事件合法。

法官严厉斥责司法部高级官员，并下令调查特朗普的高尔夫球场计划

“我们不是在讨论食堂的规划，政府究竟打算如何利用这个设施来维护国家安全？”楚特坎追问司法部律师罗伯特·斯坦德。

对此，斯坦德提到了多次针对特朗普的暗杀企图，楚特坎反驳道：“拱门难道是为了阻止对总统的暗杀企图吗？它还要三年才能完工。”

她还对在司法部称每天将吸引多达 22,000 名平民游客的地区部署军事装备表示担忧。

司法部辩称，挑战者不具备诉讼资格，因为相关计划要到下周的国家国会大厦规划委员会会议才会最终确定。然而，政府此前曾表示，一旦获得批准，当天即可开工建设。楚特坎指出，按照这种逻辑，原告只有一天的时间提起诉讼。

她问道：“当推土机开始挖地的时候，最终的机构行动会是什么？”

起诉政府的退伍军人团体请求法院颁布紧急命令，立即停止拱门的建设，他们认为拱门会破坏阿灵顿国家公墓墓地的神圣性。拟建的拱门会阻挡从林肯纪念堂到阿灵顿国家公墓这排国家地标的清晰视线。周五，几位退伍军人在法庭上发言。

吉姆·沃森/法新社/盖蒂图片社

“千载难逢的国防机遇”：在法律战中，赫格塞斯全力支持特朗普的竞选纲领

Chutkan告诉原告，她对任何“对政府的厌恶和反感”都不感兴趣，而是关心即将建成的拱门会如何影响他们的个人经历。

她似乎也赞同这样一种观点：退伍军人比舞厅案中以美观为由提起诉讼的原告损失更大，因为他们是阿灵顿国家公墓的积极参与者，而且拱门的建设尚未开始。

“这片区域仍然保持着原始风貌，视野开阔，那么为什么这个案例不像高尔夫球场案例那样呢？”楚特坎问道。

特朗普拱门在弗吉尼亚州面临来自县委员会的另一项诉讼，因此，楚特坎法官未来的任何裁决都不会是该项目法律挑战的终结。