Documents reveal Trump’s epic fight with preservationists over historic building

Since returning to the White House, President Donald Trump has pushed a variety of architectural and makeover projects for the Washington, DC area — from a proposed White House ballroom to a triumphal arch near Arlington Cemetery to Kennedy Center renovations. Trump has also eyed the Eisenhower Executive Office Building (EEOB) near the White House for a possible makeover, and according to Bloomberg News' Jason Leopold, Trump White House e-mails obtained via Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests show the heated debates about their proposals.

"Remember when President Barack Obama wore a tan suit to a 2014 White House press briefing on terrorism — and sparked widespread derision from the media and Republican lawmakers?" Leopold writes in an "FOIA Files" column for Bloomberg. "President Donald Trump's proposal to paint the historic Eisenhower Executive Office Building gleaming white has drawn a similar reaction from preservationists and architects, though this time, there could be consequences beyond a sartorial faux pas. To find out what the fuss was all about, I filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the National Capital Planning Commission, the federal agency that approves construction projects in Washington."

The Eisenhower Building, originally called the State, War and Navy Building, was built in the late 19th Century and renamed after President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1999. Trump, Leopold notes, proposed a makeover in August 2025 and posted "renderings" on Truth Social. After Trump issued his executive order, "Make Federal Architecture Beautiful Again," preservationists filed a lawsuit and laid out their objections to Trump's ideas.

"The e-mails from the NCPC, whose 12 members are Trump appointees, detail what unfolded over the past six months," Leopold reports. "The project, which a White House official recently estimated would cost taxpayers around $7.5 million, has not yet received final approval. The communications I obtained suggest it is being fast-tracked and could be approved as early as July. Another federal agency referenced in the documents, the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, is also reviewing the project…. After the plans were submitted, the NCPC received a barrage of criticism. The commission received more than 2000 comments, the overwhelming majority of which were negative, according to the cache of documents I received."

The Bloomberg journalist continues, "Some of the comments, which do not appear to have been publicly released, were from the DC State Historic Preservation Office. They are brutal."

For example, the Preservation Office wrote, "Painting the granite facades of the EEOB in white would not be beautification but an act of architectural vandalism of the highest order. What would be next? Painting the Treasury in matching white?"

Priya Jain of the Society of Architectural Historians discussed the proposals with Bloomberg News, complaining, "This seems like such a needless project. It is a disrespect for this building's history to come in and say, 'We don't care for the original architecture of this building. We think it’s better to just paint this all white. To me, that is so shocking.'"