U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper on June 12 denied a last-minute request by the Kennedy Center board to pause his earlier order requiring the removal of President Donald Trump's name from the performing arts venue in Washington, ruling that the board had illegally added the name without congressional authorization [1][2][4]. Workers were seen erecting scaffolding on the building's facade later that day, though the name had not yet been physically removed by 5:30 p.m. ET [2]. The ruling rested on a 1964 statute that established the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts as a congressionally designated presidential memorial, reserving naming authority exclusively to Congress [7][10][12].
Cooper stated in his denial of the stay that the public interest "is rarely served by the 'perpetuation' of 'unlawful' governmental action" [2]. His 94-page opinion found that the Trump-appointed board exceeded its statutory authority by unilaterally renaming the venue and that only an act of Congress could alter the designation [7][16]. The order required the removal of Trump's name from all exterior and interior signage, official materials, and trademarks within 14 days, and separately blocked a planned two-year renovation closure of the center [15][17][21].
The administration immediately appealed. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit — Judges Gregory Katsas, Robert Wilkins, and Patricia Millett — unanimously denied the emergency motion for a stay [3]. Katsas is a Trump appointee [3]. The legal team for the Kennedy Center board and the Department of Justice had argued that removing the name would halt fundraising and force the return of hundreds of millions of dollars in donations [3][9].
Trump responded on social media, writing: "Unfortunately, Judge Cooper and the Radical Left would rather see it DIE than have President Trump transform it into something that everyone could be proud of" [1]. ABC News reported that conservative legal commentators and some Republican lawmakers characterized the decision as judicial overreach [9]. The administration's position received limited elaboration in the available record beyond Trump's own statements and the DOJ's procedural arguments for a stay [1][9].
Outside the Kennedy Center, a crowd gathered after the appeals court ruling. Sharon, a retired preschool teacher and Kennedy Center patron, told The Guardian: "I needed to have a little hope that we are gonna get through this craziness... I needed to see something where the good guys win" [3]. She compared Trump's practice of placing his name on public buildings to authoritarianism seen in North Korea [3]. Katrina Clark, a local performing artist, described the moment as "a catharsis" after what she called years of oppression in the arts [3]. Carolyn, a retired government worker, said: "Putting his name on everything is right out of the dictator playbook" [3]. Democratic Congresswoman Joyce Beatty of Ohio celebrated with protesters and reminded the crowd that the center was created by Congress as a memorial to President Kennedy [3][8]. Norm Eisen, a former Obama administration ethics official and plaintiff in the case, wrote that Trump was "losing & just making the spectacle worse for him" [3].
The ruling drew attention across regions and languages. Le Monde reported that the founding statute mandates the center bear only President Kennedy's name and that Congress alone can change it [12]. El País noted that the 94-page decision left the future of the institution uncertain, including the status of the planned renovation closure [16]. G1 in Brazil reported the ruling as a clear statement that the board had exceeded its legal limits [17]. Izvestia in Russia framed the decision as a court prohibiting Trump from renaming the center in his honor, emphasizing the symbolic defeat [18]. Al Jazeera's Arabic-language service described the ruling as a "صفعة قضائية" (judicial slap) to Trump [19]. The Chosun Ilbo in South Korea reported that the court ordered the removal of Trump's name from all internal and external signage and official documents [21]. Deutschlandfunk and SRF in Germany and Switzerland, respectively, noted that the court also blocked the planned two-year closure for renovations [14][15]. BBC News Japan provided a summary emphasizing that the name change required congressional approval and that the board had acted illegally [20].
RFI placed the Kennedy Center ruling alongside two other judicial setbacks for Trump within a 24-hour period, including rulings on taxes and what it called a "caisse noire" (slush fund) case, framing the events as a pattern of courts checking executive action [13]. The Guardian's live coverage similarly noted the ruling as one of several adverse court decisions for the administration on the same day [3].
A separate but thematically related ruling issued the same week by Massachusetts District Judge Angel Kelley ordered the Trump administration to reinstate history and science displays removed from national monuments under a 2025 executive order [6]. Kelley wrote that "under the guise of promoting American dignity, this administration seeks to share a limited history by ordering the removal of all signs, displays, and interpretive exhibits at national parks that do not align with its preferred narrative, thereby telling half-truths" [6]. Alan Spears of the National Parks Conservation Association said Americans "count on national parks to help us understand our full, rich history" [6]. Emily Thompson of the Coalition to Protect America's National Parks stated that national parks "exist to preserve and interpret the full American story, not just the parts that make some politicians comfortable" [6].
The Kennedy Center board's appeal remains pending before the D.C. Circuit. The physical removal of Trump's name from the building had not been completed as of the most recent reports [2]. The administration has not indicated whether it will seek further review from the Supreme Court [3].