A federal judge in Washington has ordered President Trump's name removed from the Kennedy Center and blocked a major renovation project, ruling Friday that the performing arts venue's board had no authority to rename the iconic institution.
U.S. District Judge Christopher R. Cooper issued a sweeping 94-page decision concluding that only Congress can change the Kennedy Center's official name, which was bestowed by lawmakers in 1964. Trump's name had been affixed to the building's facade following the board's decision to rename it earlier this year.
"Congress gave the Kennedy Center its name, and only Congress can change it," Cooper wrote in the order, which also halted the facility's scheduled closure needed for the renovations to proceed.
The ruling stems from a lawsuit filed by Rep. Joyce Beatty of Ohio, a board member who challenged changes to the center's bylaws that stripped her voting rights. Beatty argued that amendments made in 2025 converted her position to a non-voting status, violating her rights as a board member.
Trump had dismissed several Kennedy Center board members in February 2025 and appointed replacements aligned with his administration. The reconstituted board, which now includes Attorney General Pam Bondi and U.S. Ambassador to India Sergio Gor, elected Trump as chairman and approved the name change and renovation project.
In his decision, Cooper emphasized Congress's deliberate choice in 1964 to designate the venue the "John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts." He noted that lawmakers took specific steps to prevent other memorial dedications from appearing in the center's public spaces, making the statutory intent clear.
The board's action to rename the center and affix Trump's name to its exterior "violate Congress's unequivocal mandate," Cooper concluded.
The renovation project, which was set to close the Kennedy Center later this year, is now halted pending resolution of the legal dispute.
Author James Rodriguez: "This is a significant check on executive power over cultural institutions, and the judge's reading of Congress's original intent appears airtight."
Comments