Trump-backed National Capital Planning Commission moves to approve giant Triumphal Arch in Washington despite widespread opposition
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
The commission, packed with Trump appointees, is set to vote Thursday on the 250-foot monument, even as Virginia, the District of Columbia and preservation groups fight it in court and warn it would damage law, history and the city’s landscape.
The National Capital Planning Commission is expected to vote Thursday to approve President Donald Trump’s proposed “Triumphal Arch” on Memorial Circle, a site between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery. The commission, whose members were appointed by the president, is likely to give the project a green light after a hearing that drew a large number of local residents voicing opposition.
Mark Paoletta, the Office of Management and Budget general counsel who chairs the commission, called the lack of a similar memorial a “national disgrace” and praised Trump’s “monumental vision,” saying the structure would be “the grandest arch ever built by mankind.”
Opponents, including the governments of Virginia and the District of Columbia, have filed for an emergency court order to block construction, arguing the project violates multiple federal statutes and exceeds the District’s 130-foot height limit. They contend the arch would obstruct the historic sightline between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery and disrupt local traffic and environmental responsibilities.
“It is entirely foreseeable that, once construction begins, Defendants will argue, as they have done in other cases, that an order halting construction would irreparably harm the federal government, pose security risks, and impermissibly alter the status quo they have unilaterally created,” the plaintiffs wrote.
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan has asked to be notified after the commission’s vote. While Trump has said the arch would celebrate the nation’s 250th anniversary and include a military complex with drones and snipers, the final design submitted to the commission does not mention those elements. Greg Wischer, deputy chief of staff at the Interior Department, said the current design can “host national security functions,” but details are sealed in the court case.
Preservationists and veterans, who first sued earlier this year, argue that the monument’s location would disrupt a century-old viewshed and that the project requires congressional authorization. Vietnam War veteran Michael Lemmon, a former U.S. ambassador to Armenia, described the arch as “frankly blasphemous” during testimony.
The administration’s legal filings argue that the city and state lack standing and cite a historical congressional authorization for tall monuments, though attorneys for Virginia and the District of Columbia called those arguments implausible, noting that the cited Memorial Bridge Act does not mention an arch.