Decades-old suit allowing Trump to reorganize the White House

US President Donald Trump plans to demolish the entire “existing structure” of the White House East Wing to build a new ballroom – despite earlier assurances that the addition would “not interfere with the existing building”.

The sight of the demolition has sparked outrage among Democrats as well as preservation groups including the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which has written a letter to Trump urging him to conduct a public review process.

As a former property developer, Trump has extensive experience navigating planning restrictions and has occasionally clashed with campaigners who object to his plans.

Under the nearly 60-year-old law, the White House and many other notable buildings are exempted from important historic preservation rules – although one expert told the BBC that presidents usually still comply.

Trump’s renewal appears to be the biggest in decades, but the US president has the power to make those changes.

And he’s not the first to remodel the White House. Over the years, many presidents have had renovations ranging from bowling alleys to indoor swimming pools.

Under a law known as the National Historic Preservation Act, federal agencies are required to investigate the impact of any construction projects on historic properties. Specifically, Section 106 requires agencies to go through a review process, including receiving input from the public.

Then-President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the law in 1966, after a period of rapid development in the US — including federally-funded infrastructure projects — raised concerns that cultural and historical landmarks were being destroyed.

According to Section 107 of the Act, three buildings and their grounds are exempt from the Section 106 review process: the White House, the US Capitol, and the US Supreme Court building.

In the past, however, presidents have typically voluntarily submitted their plans to the National Capital Planning Commission — which oversees federal building construction — before construction projects begin.

Trump officials haven’t done so yet, but they plan to, though renovations have already begun.

Priya Jain, chair of the Society of Architectural Historians’ heritage preservation committee, told the BBC that the process set out by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 was sound and would have been the “best method” for renovating Trump’s East Wing.

These reviews—which can take several years—include discussions about programmatic requirements and potential options.

“In this case, it would have been: Do we need a ballroom this big? Should it be smaller?” Jain, professor of architecture at Texas A&M University, said. “Could it have been an extension of the east wing? Could it have been sunk?”

At stake, she said, is the building’s “history.” All the additions to the White House over time have added to how people perceive the building and the country at the time, she said.

“It’s a memory,” she said. “The East Wing is 83 years old. It has its own historical significance. I haven’t seen much there about how it’s been evaluated.”