As the Donald Trump U.S. administration is pushing harder for construction of a White House banquet hall in the wake of the shooting in the White House press corps' dining room, controversy is growing after it disclosed information directly tied to national security while stressing the hall's necessity.
On the 29th (local time), The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported, "Trump administration officials are unusually disclosing national security plans to keep the president's planned banquet hall on track," adding, "How to protect the president in the event of an attack on the White House is not a topic the government typically discusses publicly."
On the 31st of last month, when a court accepted a preliminary injunction request by the National Trust for Historic Preservation (NTHP) to halt the banquet hall construction, which is proceeding without congressional consent, the Trump administration immediately appealed. In the process, it submitted to the appeals court a document containing fairly specific measures for protecting the president in the event of a White House attack.
In the document, Army Minister Dan Driscoll detailed the structure of an underground bunker capable of withstanding a precision drone attack on the White House. He said that in the event of a national security threat, the president should remain in an on-site bunker rather than be evacuated off-site, noting, "Securing this hardened underground bunker is essential to ensuring uninterrupted command and control on-site."
Immediately after the filing containing Driscoll's statement was received, the appeals court allowed construction to continue at least until early June. The appeals court is currently reviewing whether President Trump has the legal authority to build the banquet hall using private donations, and arguments are set for June 5.
Since then, experts have criticized the level of information the administration made public as excessively high. A former senior national security official who served in multiple administrations told the WSJ, "This disclosure includes some of the most sensitive security information handled by the White House and could help adversaries devise countermeasures."
Former Secret Service agent Bill Gage also said, "This kind of material should not be discussed publicly," adding, "It is surprising it was not submitted under seal."
Driscoll also said the new banquet hall would reinforce the White House East Wing and serve as a physical defensive layer protecting the bunker from attacks by unmanned aerial vehicles carrying explosives. He said, "From a civil engineering perspective, this exterior layer channels an explosion to occur at a certain distance, creating a critical space called a 'standoff' or 'air gap depth.'"
Regarding the detailed disclosure of defensive structures and operating principles, William Banks, a national security law expert and professor at Syracuse University, noted that the key question is whether the administration disclosed an actual operational plan or did so to secure legal justification. He criticized, "If this is accurate, it approaches the level of irresponsibility."