A federal judge has placed a new restriction on what can happen next at the Kennedy Center, ordering officials to give at least 30 days of advance notice before making any major physical changes to the historic performing arts complex.
According to the Associated Press, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper issued the order Thursday, September 17, after a rapidly escalating dispute over the building’s closure and concerns that the property could eventually be demolished. Cooper said the requirement was intended to “avoid any confusion on that score given more recent events.”
The Kennedy Center order arrives one day after Trump publicly suggested the building could ultimately be torn down if his efforts to renovate it are not recognized. According to the Associated Press, Trump, who became chairman of the Kennedy Center board in 2025, said his work on the aging facility deserved recognition, “because frankly, if we don’t do that, it’s going to close. It’ll end up being ripped down. It’s in very, very bad shape, very dangerous shape.”
The legal intervention comes as the Kennedy Center is already closed on what officials describe as an emergency basis. The Associated Press reported that executive director and chief operating officer Matt Floca told the court that he ordered the temporary shutdown because of “acute risks to public safety resulting from continued structural deterioration.”
Floca said the building would remain closed for at least seven days so officials could “assess existing safety risks in those portions of the main building exhibiting severe structural deterioration.” Officials pointed to an inspection of the roof terrace canopy and a partial ceiling collapse earlier in September as reasons for the immediate shutdown. The closure could be extended depending on what inspectors find.
That temporary action is separate from a broader Kennedy Center board decision to close most of the venue for renovations. Reuters reported that the board voted to close the center for as long as two years while a $257 million renovation project moves forward. Congress has already allocated that money for repairs, according to both Reuters and the Associated Press.
Questions about what the closure could mean for the building reached federal court after Rep. Joyce Beatty of Ohio, a Democrat and ex officio member of the Kennedy Center board, sought emergency judicial intervention. Beatty described the shutdown as an “unlawful closing.”
Her lawyers went further in a Thursday filing, telling the court that the board members’ “rationale that they are only temporarily closing the Kennedy Center is a plain pretext to justify shutting down the Center permanently. The facts before the Court are deeply concerning.” They also asked Cooper “to make crystal clear” that his previous orders prevented the building from being demolished.
Reuters reported that Beatty’s attorneys also pointed to Trump’s public comments and an image circulating online that appeared to show him viewing material containing the words “Kennedy Center DEMOLISHED.” Reuters said it had not independently verified that image. The new 30-day notice requirement means officials must alert the parties before implementing changes to the project that could include demolition of the main building.
The fight over the Kennedy Center goes beyond repairs. It has also centered on repeated attempts to place Trump’s name on the institution.
The Kennedy Center board voted in August to place an inscription on the building that would read, “The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts Restored and Renovated By President Donald J. Trump.” The plan also called for another inscription if the Trump Kennedy Center Fund reached $100 million: “Endowed by the Trump Kennedy Center Fund.” The plaza outside the building was also proposed for renaming in Trump’s honor.
Cooper blocked those plans this week, ruling that such changes could not proceed “without Congress’s blessing.” The Associated Press reported that the judge had already ruled in May that the Kennedy Center improperly added Trump’s name to the building. His name was removed in June, although scaffolding and a tarp remained in the area where the lettering had appeared.
The legal foundation for that ruling reaches back decades. Under federal law governing the Kennedy Center, Congress designated the institution as the National Center for the Performing Arts and a living memorial to John F. Kennedy. Federal law also identifies it as the sole national memorial to Kennedy within Washington and its surrounding area. The building opened in Washington in 1971, according to Reuters.
The current structural concerns are not entirely new. The Kennedy Center’s fiscal 2025 budget request described aging infrastructure and outlined the need to modernize electrical and plumbing equipment that was roughly 50 years old. The document also identified ongoing capital repair needs involving building systems, office spaces and stage equipment.
Still, the combination of safety concerns, an extended renovation proposal and the naming fight has turned the Kennedy Center into the center of a broader dispute about who controls changes to the congressionally established memorial.
Barbra Streisand, who received a Kennedy Center Honor in 2008, also entered the conversation Thursday. Streisand called the controversy surrounding the institution “galling and painful to witness.”
Addressing Trump’s efforts to secure recognition on the property, Streisand told the AP, “You can easily imagine my indignation at seeing this revered institution become the subject of such a bitter struggle over one man’s name and unchecked ego.”
Streisand also reflected on what receiving a Kennedy Center Honor represented to her, saying, “For me, and for so many artists, that honor represented something larger than a career recognition. It represented a belief in the importance of art to the life of a democracy.”
For now, the Kennedy Center remains caught between documented repair needs and an unresolved legal battle over how those repairs can proceed. Cooper’s latest order does not eliminate the possibility of future major construction changes, but it establishes a notice period that gives the court and the parties time to respond before any significant alteration, including demolition, moves forward.
