The Supreme Court bulldozes the People's House 

American history has been turned upside down. In order to prevent any president from becoming a king, our Founding Fathers wisely established three branches of government: the Executive, the Legislative, and the Judicial. But that's no longer the case. Today we only have one branch, the Executive, where the president has absolute power. The other two, once equally powerful branches of government, are empty vessels. Congress merely delivers whatever new laws the president wants or gets rid of ones he doesn't like; the Supreme Court exists only to rubber stamp anything the president does and knock down any attempts to stop him.

That's not a prediction of how things might turn out. That's the mess we're in today. Where both the Republican-controlled Congress and the Republican-stacked Supreme Court have surrendered whatever powers they used to have in order to serve as nothing but Donald Trump's lackeys. And that's never been more apparent than in this week's 5-4 Supreme Court decision allowing Trump to proceed with construction of his monumental (to himself) ballroom.

Any president has authority to maintain and make minor repairs to the White House, but by law, as two lower courts affirmed, any major structural changes to the White House must first be approved by Congress. Without its approval, constructing a mammoth new ballroom addition to the White House is downright illegal.

But, of course, that didn't stop Donald Trump. After returning from a trip to Saudi Arabia in May 2025, he proposed building a new White House ballroom even bigger and glitzier than the king's. Which, like everything Trump does, was sold all on a pack of lies. That every other president had yearned for a ballroom. That it would be built near the East Wing, without touching it. And that it would be entirely paid for by big donors, with no taxpayer dollars involved. Only much later, after the failed assassination attempt at the White House Correspondents' Dinner, did Trump add another lie: that the ballroom was necessary to protect the president from harm.

Then, in October 2025, without seeking approval from Congress, Trump ordered contractors to tear down the East Wing of the White House and start construction of his ballroom. He did so, counting on Republicans in Congress to do nothing. He could paint the White House blue and they wouldn't object. And trusting his Supreme Court to save his butt, if necessary. He was right about both.

On behalf of one prominent D.C. resident, the National Trust for Historic Preservation sued Trump for breaking the law. D.C. District Court judge Richard J. Leon agreed, but - mistakenly - allowed construction to continue while his decision was appealed. The D.C. appeals court also agreed, voting 2-1 against Trump, but again allowed construction to proceed while Trump's lawyers begged the Supreme Court to step in. Which the court did, in a decision no freshman law student could read without laughing out loud.

Clearly, the only question five justices asked before voting was not "what's the law say?" but "what's my dear leader want?" Their ruling is so blatantly political, it's embarrassing.

First, they ruled that the Trust for Historic Preservation had no "standing" to file the lawsuit. What? The Trust was created by Congress over 75 years ago precisely "to save America's historic sites." If the White House doesn't qualify for protection, what does? It's not Donald Trump's house. It's the people's house. Certainly, representing all Americans angry over Trump's destruction of our house, the Trust has standing to sue to save the White House.

Second, five conservative justices swallowed the administration's phony argument that Trump was building a "military complex," not just a ballroom. Therefore, without a ballroom, you'd be endangering the life of the president. Ridiculous! There's long been a security bunker under the White House, and no doubt it needed some improvements. But that doesn't mean you have to build a 90,000 square foot Taj Mahal on top of it. The frivolous ballroom has nothing to do with serious national security.

Most surprisingly, Chief Justice John Roberts himself joined three liberals on the court and wrote their strong dissent, asserting that Trump's construction of the ballroom was "likely unlawful." The White House is "an iconic American building," Roberts wrote. "All the more reason to ensure that those responsible follow the rules in deciding what to tear down and what to build up at the People's House."

But when did Donald Trump ever follow the rules? He never has and he never will.

(Bill Press is host of The Bill Press Pod, and author of 10 books, including: "From the Left: My Life in the Crossfire." His email address is: bill@billpress.com. Readers may also follow him on Twitter @billpresspod and on BlueSky @BillPress.bsky.social.)

(C)2026 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
 

Does anybody know where Melania is?

We all know where President Trump is, every minute of every day. He's in the Oval Office. He's playing golf. He's in Turkey. He's playing golf. He's in California and Nevada. He's playing golf. He's in Michigan, Long Island, and Georgia. He's playing golf.

But, more and more, the big question is: Where is the first l ady? And the answer is: Only a handful of people outside of her Secret Service detail really know. The rest of us are kept in the dark.

Donald Trump often brags that everything about his administration is the "greatest" in American history. In this case, he's right. Melania Trump has the "greatest disappearance record" of any first lady ever.

On August 19, the Daily Beast reported that Melania has been seen in public only 38 out of 231 days so far in 2026. Most notably on April 9, when she held a surprise White House news conference to deny she was a friend of Jeffrey Epstein or knew anything about his crimes.

Since then, for the most part, First Lady Melania Trump has been "MIA." She did not go to China with the president on May 13 to 15. She did not attend the "dignified transfer" of remains at Dover Air Force Base on July 22. She did not show up with Trump for the rescheduled White House Correspondents' Association Dinner on July 24. She was not alongside Trump at Lindsey Graham's funeral on July 28.

In fact, the last time Melania was seen in public was July 19, when she accompanied her husband to the World Cup final. That's five weeks with no sighting of the first lady. Just imagine the reaction had Michelle Obama gone off the grid for five weeks. Republicans would have tried to impeach her!

Since July 19, the only word we've had of the first lady came on August 5, when Donald Trump told a crowd of supporters in Las Vegas: "Melania says hello." How do we know? How does he know?

So where's she hanging out? Definitely not at the White House. I asked the White House press office and got no response. Reporters I spoke to speculate she's holed up at Trump's golf course in Bedminster, New Jersey. If so, she's hiding out there, too. The president spent the last two weekends at Bedminster. There were plenty of photos of him hanging out with executive assistant Natalie Harp. But not one picture of him and Melania.

True, a couple of days ago, the White House press office issued a terse statement: "First Lady Melania Trump facilitated the reunification of another child with her family on Monday, August 17, 2026, after being separated during the Ukraine-Russia Federation conflict." But that doesn't tell us where she is. That memo could have been sent from Mar-a-Lago, or Bedminster, or Trump Tower - or Mars.

OK, let's first establish this. The first lady is not an elected official. She has no power and no official responsibilities. Melania Trump's not required to do anything, or show up for anything. She's free to escape to the south of France for the next two years if she wants, and maybe already has.

But, but, but - by not stepping up to fulfill the traditional role of first lady, she's short-changing the American people. Elected or not, first ladies play an important role: representing the United States around the world, championing important causes, serving as informal adviser to the president, traveling around the country, and connecting the White House with ordinary Americans.

Starting with Martha Washington and Abigail Adams, first ladies have made an important contribution on issues they championed: Eleanor Roosevelt on civil rights; Lady Bird Johnson on environment; Betty Ford on breast cancer; Barbara Bush on literacy; Hillary Clinton on health care; Laura Bush on libraries; Michelle Obama on help to military families; Jill Biden on women's health.

Melania could make a big difference, too, if she chose to. After all, in her memoir, she says Trump places "a considerable amount of trust" in her. So, as an immigrant herself, she might persuade Trump not to treat all immigrants like criminals. As an advocate for rescuing Ukrainian children kidnapped to Russia, she might convince Trump to help Ukraine win the war - which he promised to end on Day One. As a person of good taste, she might even coax Trump to stop turning the White House into a gilded Las Vegas bordello.

Where are you, Melania, when we need you most?
____

(Bill Press is host of The BillPressPod, and author of 10 books, including: "From the Left: My Life in the Crossfire." His email address is: bill@billpress.com. Readers may also follow him on Twitter @billpresspod and on BlueSky @BillPress.bsky.social.)

(C)2026 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.