Can Trump Legally Demolish the Kennedy Center? Experts Say Not Easily.

At first, the Trump administration raised the prospect of demolition quietly, burying the suggestion that the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts may eventually need to be dismantled in a legal brief in late August.But it still drew notice, and weeks later, ears perked again when the president told reporters the building was so dilapidated it might one day require demolition.That night, any subtlety evaporated when he was photographed on Air Force One with a large poster titled "Kennedy Center DEMOLISHED." People who worried about the future of the historic performing arts institution had visions of bulldozers rolling toward its marble facade.The White House and the Kennedy Center have since declined to clarify just how seriously Trump is considering trying to knock down the building. But it's clear that in recent months, he has been infuriated by the constraints a federal judge has placed on his reign over the venue.What's also clear, legal experts say, is that Trump cannot legally demolish the Kennedy Center in short order. After a federal judge was alerted to the ominous photos of the president on Air Force One, he ordered the administration to announce any demolition plans more than 30 days in advance so that legal objections could be heard. Beyond that court-imposed buffer, experts say there are layers of legal protections that insulate the Kennedy Center from the wrecking ball."I don't think it's likely that we'll see bulldozers around the Kennedy Center any time soon," said Paul Edmondson, a lawyer who specializes in historic preservation law.Still, in an administration known for unpredictability, experts say there are no guarantees. While the center's leadership made assurances months ago that demolition was not being contemplated, Trump, who is chair of the center's board, went on to speak openly of the prospect."The president has a pattern of moving so fast that it's difficult to catch up," Edmondson said.Asked to detail current thinking on any potential demolition, a spokesperson for the center declined to comment. The White House declined to elaborate, saying in a statement that Democrats had "let the Kennedy Center rot" and that without Trump's intervention, the center will "inevitably continue to decline."If the president were to move forward with a knockdown plan, here are the legal hurdles he would have to clear. The center's founding law The legal fight over Trump's takeover of the center has revolved largely around one important statute, first passed by Congress in 1958. It established a National Cultural Center and then was amended in 1964 to dedicate the institution to Kennedy after his assassination.The law requires the institution's board to "maintain and administer" the center as a "living memorial," which involves presenting performing arts such as music, theater and dance."The statute that created the Kennedy Center requires that there be a building at that particular location that provides performing arts to the public," said David Super, a law professor at Georgetown University. "A demolition is irreconcilable with that goal."Rep. Joyce Beatty, D-Ohio, an ex officio board member, invoked the statute in a lawsuit objecting to the addition of Trump's name to the building and to his plan to close the center for a two-year, $257 million renovation project.In response, a federal judge ordered Trump's name removed, citing Congress' authority over the center. He also temporarily blocked the closure, which Trump had been championing for months.This month, the center's top leader closed the building temporarily based on "acute risks to public safety," while a smaller annex known as the Reach has remained open for limited programming.Some lawmakers introduced legislation intended to leave no room for confusion on the question of demolition. The bill, spearheaded by Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., would state explicitly that no memorial to a president can be torn down without approval from Congress. It gained the support of at least one Republican: Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. But on Monday it was blocked from receiving fast-tracked approval by Sen. Mike Lee of Utah, an ally of Trump. A judge's order Concerns that Trump could try to demolish all or part of the Kennedy Center first arose in February, when the president announced on social media that the center would close for a "Complete Rebuilding."An alliance of historic preservation and architectural groups sued and asked a federal judge to intervene to bar any demolition plan, citing the abrupt dismantling of the White House's East Wing -- without notice -- as a reason to be especially cautious.Judge Christopher R. Cooper of U.S. District Court in Washington stopped short of expressly prohibiting demolition because, he reasoned, there was no immediate threat. He cited sworn court testimony by Matt Floca, the center's executive director, who denied that knocking down the center was being considered as an option.But talk of demolition has since escalated. In August, Justice Department lawyers said in a filing that if the center was not renovated as planned, it would deteriorate to the point that it would need to be "taken down" -- and possibly replaced with a "large outdoor amphitheater." Trump told reporters that the center would "end up being ripped down" if he is not allowed to proceed with his plans, which include adding his name back onto the building.After Cooper was alerted to the photos of Trump with the demolition poster, he issued the order requiring more than 30 days' notice if the administration were to attempt to pursue such a plan. Experts predicted any notice of a knockdown plan would lead the judge to block demolition while the legal fight plays out.(BEGIN OPTIONAL TRIM.)Paul Schiff Berman, a law professor at George Washington University, said that if the center went ahead anyway with demolition, anyone involved would risk being found in contempt of court."If they tried to simply knock down the Kennedy Center," he said, "I think there could be no plausible argument that they were not outright defying a federal court order."Trump can also ask higher courts for a stay of any lower court order. In the case of the White House ballroom, the Supreme Court sided last month with the administration in a 5-4 vote, allowing construction to continue amid a legal challenge.(END OPTIONAL TRIM.) A tangle of legal bureaucracy Designed by architect Edward Durell Stone, the Kennedy Center -- with its white Carrara marble from Italy and its 63-foot-tall ceilings -- holds the sort of protections that would likely turn a demolition plan into a bureaucratic labyrinth.To pass muster, experts said, the plan would need to be reviewed by two panels that help to manage development in Washington -- the National Capital Planning Commission and the Commission of Fine Arts. They are both controlled by Trump allies, but the review process involves enough red tape to slow down any demolition plan.Such a plan would also likely be subject to a provision of the National Historic Preservation Act, which affords protections to significant properties. The regulatory process would require the Kennedy Center to solicit public feedback, and to present a justification for why demolition is the center's best option.While those processes could stymie any demolition plan, experts say that to stop one cold, opponents would need to argue that under the center's founding law, Trump simply does not have the authority to proceed without Congress' approval."He shouldn't be able to do one thing to the Kennedy Center, other than repair it, without authority from Congress," said Kimberly Wehle, a constitutional law professor at the University of Baltimore, "and tearing down the Kennedy Center is not repairs."Trump recently issued a stark ultimatum, writing on social media this month that unless an appeals court allows his name to be restored to the building, the "Reconstruction and the Renovation of The Kennedy Center will not take place."Greg Werkheiser, a lawyer who represents preservation groups in their lawsuit against the center, said that beyond the threat of razing the Kennedy Center, his clients are concerned that the building could simply be left to waste away."If we're talking about demolition by bulldozer, I tend to think the system is going to hold," Werkheiser said. "If we're talking about demolition by neglect, that's a serious concern."(STORY CAN END HERE. OPTIONAL MATERIAL FOLLOWS.)In April, while testifying in federal court, Floca unequivocally stated that "we have no plans to demolish the center." But he acknowledged it was possible that Trump could change his mind, stating, "I am not in control of his personal decision-making."This article originally appeared in The New York Times.