U.S. President Donald Trump is pushing to build a colossal triumphal arch in Washington, D.C., surpassing Paris' Arc de Triomphe, fueling a widening debate over its legal legitimacy.
On the 15th (local time), White House Spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said at a briefing that "on the 16th, plans will be unveiled to build a Triumphal Arch to commemorate the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence."
According to Spokesperson Leavitt, the structure will be built at Memorial Circle on Columbia Island, an artificial island on the Potomac River in Virginia near Washington, D.C., and, to mark the 250th anniversary of the founding, will rise to 250 feet (about 76 meters). It would tower over the White House (21 meters), Paris' Arc de Triomphe (50 meters), and even Mexico City's arch (67 meters), known as the tallest arch-type triumphal arch.
Earlier, during his first term, President Trump visited the Arc de Triomphe in Paris to attend the World War I armistice commemoration and is said to have been deeply impressed by the structure. In a media interview last December, he said he wanted to start building an arch within two months, and on the 23rd of the same month, he hinted at installing an arch by posting three designs of a large, gold-leafed triumphal arch on his Truth Social account without any explanation.
The problem is that the arch's scale has grown to more than four times the original concept, expanding the backlash surrounding it. In the early stage, the height was discussed at 76 feet to symbolize 1776, the year of America's founding, but the final height reportedly grew to 250 feet after President Trump argued the arch should be taller than Paris' Arc de Triomphe.
The design process is also seen as strongly reflecting President Trump's tastes. Architect Nicholas Leo Charbonneau, who took on the final design, presented a model featuring gold eagles and lion ornaments, which reportedly received higher marks than competing proposals that offered simpler designs.
However, the rapid expansion is turning even the experts who initially proposed the arch against the project. Catesby Leigh, an architecture critic who supported building the arch in a 2025 op-ed for the conservative think tank Claremont Institute, said, "We envisioned a commemorative project not exceeding 60 feet in Washington, the only Western capital without a monumental triumphal arch," but noted, "The building being pursued is far too large for the current site."
Veterans groups are also expressing strong opposition, saying the massive arch could damage the views and symbolism of nearby Arlington National Cemetery. Calder Loth, a former senior architectural historian at the Virginia Department of Historic Resources, said, "The arch would be an ill-mannered intrusion on the cemetery," adding, "The location itself is wrong."
A legal battle also appears to be taking shape. A Vietnam War veterans group filed a lawsuit, saying construction cannot proceed without congressional approval, and argues that explicit approval from Congress is required under the 1986 "Commemorative Works Act." The Trump administration counters that it already has legal authority, citing a provision from the 1920s approval of the Arlington Memorial Bridge design that "two pylons shall be erected on Columbia Island."
Uncertainty also hangs over funding and the construction schedule. The Trump administration did not disclose the total project cost, but the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) has allocated at least $15 million (about 2.21 billion won) to the project, and the total cost could climb higher. The White House plans to finance the total cost with a mix of public and private funds, break ground this summer, and finish construction within President Trump's term.
Meanwhile, a debate over the symbolism of the arch is also surfacing. In a CBS interview last year, President Trump stoked controversy by answering "Me" when asked whom the arch would commemorate, while the White House sought to tamp it down, saying he meant to commemorate the "enduring triumph of the American spirit."
Sarah Bond, a professor in the Department of History at the University of Iowa, said, "In ancient Rome, obtaining the Senate's approval before building a triumphal arch signified respect for the public," adding, "By contrast, President Trump seems intent on using Washington merely to flaunt his own victory."