A federal judge on Thursday demanded clearer information from the Justice Department regarding President Donald Trump’s plans to construct a championship-level golf course on a peninsula in Washington, D.C. The dispute unfolded during a hearing before Judge Ana C. Reyes in the Federal District Court, where she questioned the government’s lack of transparency and specifics about the timeline and scope of the proposed project at East Potomac Golf Links.
Judge Reyes expressed frustration with the Justice Department’s responses, noting a pattern of the Trump administration initiating construction projects without full disclosure to the courts or the public. She cited previous instances, including work on a new ballroom intended to replace part of the White House’s East Wing, which had been underway before official announcements. “I’m not going to have the president of the United States and the secretary of interior say something very concrete in public and then come in here in court and claim otherwise,” Reyes said.
The judge referenced a recent social media post by Trump, in which he declared his intention to build “one of the Greatest Golf Courses anywhere in the World” on the site. The post, accompanied by photographs of Trump touring the grounds with noted golf course designer Tom Fazio and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, stated that construction was expected to begin on September 1. Photos appeared to show Trump holding design blueprints, further indicating preparations were underway.
When asked directly about whether there was an official timeline or directive to begin construction on the proposed date, Justice Department attorney Michael Robertson could not confirm the existence of a formal schedule, saying, “I am not aware of any date other than what the president said.” Robertson maintained that federal agencies were still evaluating the project and had not finalized a decision.
Judge Reyes expressed skepticism about this stance, questioning the government’s reliability in adhering to standard approval processes and keeping the court informed. “I’m not sure that the presumption of regularity applies anymore,” she said, highlighting concerns that the administration might proceed without proper permits or environmental reviews.
Will Bardwell, representing the plaintiffs through the legal nonprofit Democracy Forward, argued that the administration had already caused environmental harm by dumping debris from the East Wing’s demolition onto the golf course site. Bardwell urged the court to halt any irreversible development until comprehensive environmental assessments were completed.
Despite her concerns, Judge Reyes indicated she was reluctant to intervene preemptively unless clear legal violations occurred. She emphasized a pragmatic approach and reiterated the principle that courts should avoid overstepping into executive or legislative roles. Instead of issuing an immediate injunction, she ordered the parties to develop a plan within two weeks to provide regular updates on any proposed changes to the East Potomac site, stressing the need for early transparency before any physical work commenced.
“I don’t want another demolished East Wing; I don’t want another demolished Reflecting Pool,” Reyes stated, referencing prior controversial projects undertaken by the administration.
The judge pressed Robertson to clarify the government’s position publicly, seeking a definitive statement that no official decision had been made to proceed with the golf course redevelopment. Robertson responded that both ongoing deliberations and planning efforts could coexist, a notion Reyes challenged. “No, both things cannot be true,” she said. “On this earth, we have a decision that’s been made about a golf course.”
The hearing marks the latest development in the judicial scrutiny of the Trump administration’s efforts to reshape parts of the nation’s capital, reflecting ongoing tensions over transparency, environmental compliance, and the appropriate scope of executive authority.