President Donald Trump's administration told the Supreme Court that its controversial White House ballroom project is "65% finished," arguing that it is too late for judges to halt construction. But newly reviewed budget and internal records suggest that number does not add up, according to The Washington Post.

The claim came from White House official Joshua Fisher in a filing urging the justices to overturn a lower court ruling that had ordered aboveground construction stopped due to a lack of congressional approval. The dispute sits at the intersection of two long-standing constitutional principles: the Appropriations Clause, which reserves federal spending decisions to Congress, and the executive's authority over operations of the White House complex itself. Fisher's filing also disclosed that the underground portion of the project includes a security complex built to withstand "bombs, rockets, missiles, even nuclear blasts," and projected an August 2028 completion date — timing that appears in tension with the claim that the work is nearly two-thirds complete.

According to the report, the contract to build the East Wing "stipulates that payments to the contractor be proportional to the amount of work completed, and that work cannot begin until the government approves spending for it. Based on that, if 65 percent of the work has been done, then the government should already have paid 65 percent of the total cost of the project." In reality, only 24 percent of the money has been paid out. If the Supreme Court accepts the administration's mootness framing, the gap between claimed and documented progress could prove consequential: the percentage-completion figure is central to the argument that halting work now would waste sunk investment.

Washington Post reporter Dan Diamond, who has covered the project extensively, flagged the discrepancy directly earlier this month, describing the scale of remaining underground and aboveground work still visible at the site.

The ballroom, which replaces the East Wing demolished last October, has grown dramatically from its original pitch. What began as a $200 million, 650-person venue funded by private donors has expanded into a roughly $600 million project, with the Post reporting that taxpayers are now covering about half the cost — triple the original public estimate. That cost shift is part of what drew the lower courts' scrutiny, since private funding would not implicate Congress's spending power in the same way. Trump has since said the venue will hold closer to 900 people and feature gold trim throughout the interior, along with a rooftop "drone port."

The Supreme Court has temporarily allowed construction to continue while it weighs the administration's request, even as two lower courts have already ruled that Trump is pursuing the project unlawfully without congressional authorization. Crews have continued working 20-hour days, seven days a week, racing to make the halted-construction argument increasingly moot regardless of how the justices ultimately rule. The justices' eventual decision, and how they weigh the documented payment figures against the administration's completion claim, is the key thing to watch next — as is whether Congress moves to authorize or block the remaining spending.