Supreme Court stay in Trump ballroom case

So, Jan, you mentioned that it's a common procedural move, and it feels like it's becoming more of a common move. In the past, oftentimes, stays or injunctions would be issued so that things would stop. In this case, it's allowing construction to continue. So what happens now, and what happens ultimately if a decision is made after the construction project is mostly done? So that's a really great point, Lana, because it does seem to be happening more now because the Trump administration has got a lot more emergency appeals going throughout the court system. People are challenging things that the Trump administration is trying to do, and then they're filing emergency briefs saying, no, we should be able to do that. So the courts are really bearing the brunt of all this kind of urgency that both sides are saying they have to decide these cases with. This, again, like I said, is this common way of trying to just put things on pause, slow things down, and let's decide it. But just like the lower court entered the same pause when it was trying to decide how it was going to handle these issues, and they came out against Trump, this court could do the same thing, this brief pause, and make a completely different decision. It doesn't tell us anything. It's just a way of saying, let's take a breath for a minute and make a more reasoned decision. Now, when we get to the merits, that's going to be the big deal. When the Supreme Court does issue, and I don't think we'll get anything before next week at the soonest, when they do decide how they're going to handle this, that will then set the tone for how the construction can or cannot continue. The lower courts in this case said no, Trump has no authority to do this. You've got to stop the construction. You can finish the underground security facilities, but no above ground stuff. Nothing. The Trump administration is saying that itself raises National Security concerns, and we need to be able to do this ballroom, and we have the authority to do it. So that's what we're waiting on. That decision from the court, whether Trump can build this ballroom, that's what we're talking about, or whether the lower court rulings will stay in place more permanently and will stop this project.

And, Jan, this will strike many as a win, at least temporarily, for the administration, if not a definitive win, at least a temporary one. And honestly, as you pointed out, it's a mess. Right now, it is an open construction site at the White House. Do we know if the Supreme Court will ultimately rule on this case, or if they're going to ultimately kick it back to the lower court to make the decision? And, when do we expect any of this to be resolved? Well, so what we have now is this kind of preliminary-- these are preliminary issues, and the lower court granted this kind of emergency injunction to stop this construction now. That's where we are. And now, the court has put that on pause while they decide how they're going to handle it. But what this means going forward is sure, I mean, if the court rules against the Trump administration, then that would be, potentially, the end of this ballroom project. Now, there are other-- or if they rule for the Trump administration, that means construction can continue like it is right now, like it's been going on now for quite some time. But there are other ways other people could try to challenge the ballroom. I don't think this would be the end of all the legal challenges. Perhaps, there are other organizations that could try to file a lawsuit. Perhaps, there are different arguments that they could make trying to attack, for example, the funding and how the funding is going for this ballroom. So a win for the Trump administration, ultimately, from the Supreme Court, which, as to your question, I think, would not happen before the next week to maybe, three, who knows? That would be very significant, but it wouldn't necessarily mean the end of any kind of legal efforts to stop this project. I think you're going to try to see some people come up with some pretty creative legal arguments. They're not going to give up that easily.

All right, Jan, good to see you. Jan Crawford. Thanks.