09/17/2026
**Update**
The judge denied the plaintiff’s request for an emergency hearing, but laid out clear next steps and strict rules for the defendants regarding the Kennedy Center:
Emergency Hearing Request Denied: The judge rejected the plaintiff's demand for an immediate, emergency hearing.
Update on Repairs Due (Sept 23, 2026): By September 23, the defendants must file an official, detailed update explaining the "temporary closure" and emergency repair work happening at the Kennedy Center. This must include a sworn statement under oath from a qualified Kennedy Center representative.
30-Day Advance Warning for Major Changes: The defendants previously assured the court in a related case (D.C. Preservation League) that the main building won't be torn down and no new structures will be built. To ensure no surprises given recent events, the judge ordered the defendants to give the plaintiffs at least 30 days' written notice before making any major changes to those plans—especially if those changes involve demolition.
Permission to Request Evidence: The plaintiff is allowed to request information and documents (discovery) related to their recent supplemental filing, as long as it follows the standard court rules and deadlines.
Full order:
MINUTE ORDER: Plaintiff's [84] Motion for an Emergency Hearing is hereby DENIED. By September 23, 2026, Defendants shall a file a detailed status report, supported by a sworn declaration from a knowledgeable representative of the Kennedy Center, on the "temporary closure" and emergency repairs described in Defendants' [86] Response and Mr. Floca's [86-1] supporting declaration. Further, the parties are reminded of Defendants' representation to the Court in the companion case D.C. Preservation League that they will "inform Plaintiffs and the Court if there is any change in the Board's plans that would constitute a reversal of the Center's position that the building will not be demolished and that no new structure will be constructed." Joint Meet & Confer Report (Aug. 28, 2026), Case No. 26-cv-981 (CRC), ECF No. 62 at 2. To avoid any confusion on that score given more recent events, the Court hereby ORDERS Defendants to provide such notice in writing to Plaintiffs in both cases more than 30 days before the implementation of any changes to the scope of the project plans presented to the Court in D.C. Preservation League, including but not limited to any "demolition" of the Center's main building. Finally, Plaintiff may seek discovery regarding the subject of their [85] Notice of Supplemental Authority to the extent permitted by the Federal Rules and the Court's scheduling order. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 09/17/2026**
Statement of eight Plaintiff organizations: The American Institute of Architects (AIA), American Society of Landscape Architects, Committee of 100 on the Federal City, The Cultural Landscape Foundation, DC Preservation League, Docomomo US, National Trust for Historic Preservation, and the Society of Architectural Historians, state:
“If the current leadership of the Kennedy Center is unwilling or unable to exercise its fiduciary duty to protect the historic building and the grounds of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, the court should consider appointing a receiver or replacing that leadership. The irrevocable loss of this iconic building — whether by intent, neglect or mismanagement — appears increasingly possible. The court has invited our coalition of eight nationally recognized architectural and preservation organizations to raise additional requests for relief if new facts appear to warrant judicial intervention. We are on the verge of such a moment.”
The Kennedy Center is a trust instrumentality belonging to the American people. Its trustees are fiduciaries, not owners.
President Trump chose to make himself a Kennedy Center trustee, and the reconstituted Board elected him Chair. With those positions come legal and ethical responsibilities. Trustees owe duties of care and loyalty that require them to act to protect the institution when action is within their power. A trustee cannot sit still while the institution fails. Nor can a trustee withhold the exercise of fiduciary responsibilities to obtain a personal honor.
The situation is now stark. The Board says the Kennedy Center faces grave financial distress and urgently needs repairs. Congress has appropriated nearly $257 million for capital repair, restoration, maintenance backlog, and security needs. No plaintiff in either Kennedy Center case has sought to prevent that essential work.
Yesterday, Judge Christopher R. Cooper again ruled that the Board cannot lawfully place President Trump’s name on the Kennedy Center building or grounds without congressional authorization. President Trump responded that the renovations will not proceed unless that ruling is overturned.
This turns fiduciary responsibility on its head. If President Trump has the extraordinary ability his fellow trustees say he has to save the Kennedy Center, that gives him the extraordinary responsibility to use it—not extraordinary leverage to demand that the institution honor him.
The current leadership should do the jobs it accepted: use the resources Congress provided for their authorized purposes, repair the Kennedy Center, raise the operating support it needs, restore its programming, and put the institution first. If it is unwilling or unable to do so, those responsible should step aside.
But the Kennedy Center cannot be left without effective stewardship while its Chair conditions essential work on receiving an honor that a federal court has repeatedly held the Board lacks authority to provide. If the current leadership will neither fulfill its fiduciary obligations nor step aside, judicial protection of the Kennedy Center will become necessary.
Judge Cooper has recognized that the Kennedy Center trustees have affirmative fiduciary obligations and that failures to discharge them can cause irreparable harm. He has also made clear that trustees are not mere figureheads and must exercise due care and independence in managing property held in trust for the American people.
Our pending case separately seeks to protect the historic building and grounds from unlawful alteration. If current leadership remains unwilling or unable to protect the Kennedy Center and its campus, the court should consider appointing a receiver, limited receiver, independent monitor, or other neutral officer necessary to protect the building, oversee congressionally funded repairs, and preserve the institution while lawful governance is restored.
The Kennedy Center belongs to the American people. Its trustees are duty-bound to serve the institution—not to make the institution serve them.
# # #
Media Contact: Greg Werkheiser, Founding Partner, Cultural Heritage Partners, PLLC
(703) 408-2002 | [email protected]
About the Litigation
The eight organizations issuing this statement are plaintiffs in a federal lawsuit (No. 1:26-cv-00981) challenging actions affecting the Kennedy Center and its congressionally protected status as the national memorial to President John F. Kennedy. Represented by Cultural Heritage Partners, Foley Hoag, and Lowell & Associates, the organizations seek to ensure that the Kennedy Center's Board and federal officials comply with the laws Congress enacted to protect the historic integrity of the Center, its buildings, and grounds. The organizations' case remains open and active before Judge Christopher R. Cooper in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Their case is separate from Beatty v. Trump (No. 1:25-cv-04480), brought by Congresswoman Joyce Beatty in her capacity as a Kennedy Center trustee.
