Lawsuit to stop work on Eisenhower building withdrawn

CQ-Roll Call on Dec 15, 2025

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

WASHINGTON — Cultural Heritage Partners, the group that sued to prevent the Trump administration from painting the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, withdrew its motion Friday, saying it accepted assurances from the General Services Administration that it wouldn’t take any steps regarding the building before March 1, 2026.

The group notified the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia that it was withdrawing its motion for a temporary restraining order, a preliminary injunction and an expedited hearing. It said it was doing so after Andrew Heller filed a third declaration on Wednesday that the GSA wouldn’t seek bids, sign a contract or draft any design or construction drawing for power washing, painting or repointing the exterior of the building before March 1.

Heller is the acting commissioner of GSA’s Public Buildings Service. Cultural Heritage said his third declaration expanded the GSA’s commitments.

Cultural Heritage Partners, a D.C.-based law firm specializing in historic preservation, and the nonprofit D.C. Preservation League sued Trump, the General Services Administration and the National Park Service on Nov. 14 over plans to paint the building white.

The lawsuit said the plan would violate the National Environmental Policy Act by failing to consider the effect on the human environment and by neglecting to provide public notice or hold a public comment period. It also argues that painting the building would violate the National Historic Preservation Act, which requires agencies to consider the effects of a project on historic properties.

The building was listed in the National Register of Historic Places along with a number of neighboring buildings in 1969.