A federal judge has had enough of the Trump administration’s shifting explanations about the president’s plan to bulldoze a historic Washington park and turn it into a luxury golf destination. Now, she’s launching an investigation into whether administration officials have been misleading the court.
U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes announced the move Friday after an extraordinary hearing in which government lawyers struggled to answer basic questions about Donald Trump’s plans for East Potomac Park — including who is actually running the project and how much taxpayers could end up paying for it.
At one point, Reyes even pulled out a dictionary to read the definition of the word “involved” after a government attorney appeared unable to explain whether Interior Secretary Doug Burgum was involved in the renovation.
“What do you mean by ‘involved’?” the lawyer asked.
Apparently, even that was too complicated to answer clearly.
East Potomac Park is a 106-year-old public recreation area used by golfers, runners, cyclists, walkers and birdwatchers. But Trump has his sights set on transforming the historic site into a championship-level golf course — another vanity project that could come with an enormous bill for taxpayers.
As noted by The Daily Beast, the dispute escalated earlier this month when the administration cut down roughly 400 trees at the park without adequate notice, raising serious questions about whether officials had violated the court’s orders.
Reyes responded with a blistering ruling barring the administration from removing any more trees or making other major changes to the property.
Her opinion included an unusually pointed observation about the government’s own arguments.
“Rarely, if ever, has the United States Department of Justice urged a federal court not to believe the sitting President,” Reyes wrote.
“And yet, here we are.”
Now, Reyes says she will appoint a special master to investigate potential misconduct by the administration. If the Justice Department objects to her choice, she warned, she is prepared to conduct the investigation herself.
And she wants answers about the money.
When the judge asked how much the entire renovation would cost, government lawyers claimed no estimate existed. But they did acknowledge that a new seawall alone could cost somewhere between $150 million and $400 million.
That’s an astonishing price tag for just one piece of the project — and a potentially awkward one for an administration facing voters increasingly concerned about affordability.
The hearing also featured several uncomfortable exchanges that did little to reassure the judge.
Reyes asked a Justice Department lawyer whether he wanted to correct any false statements of material fact. When he responded, “not to my knowledge,” she immediately pressed him.
“What does ‘not to my knowledge’ mean?” she asked.
At another point, Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward appeared to include tree cutting in his description of preparations for closing the park — despite the administration’s insistence that the mass removal of trees earlier this month had nothing to do with Trump’s renovation plans.
“News flash,” Reyes shot back.
The contradictions are becoming increasingly difficult for the administration to explain away.
On October 18, Trump announced on Truth Social that the golf course would close for 15 months beginning November 15 as part of his redevelopment plans. But as Reyes pointed out during Friday’s hearing, Justice Department lawyers had insisted the very next day that there was no plan to close the course on that date.
In other words, the president announced a major closure while his own lawyers were telling a federal court something very different.
The D.C. Preservation League and local golfers sued earlier this year to stop the project, arguing that the administration’s plans threatened a historic public space.
And Trump isn’t taking kindly to the judicial scrutiny.
Earlier this week, he attacked Reyes on Truth Social, declaring that he would hold her “fully responsible” if anyone were hurt or killed on what he described as a dangerous, dilapidated golf course.
He also complained that the judge had no right to delay what he called an “important and beautiful Project,” arguing that she lacked expertise in golf, architecture, landscaping and construction.
But the issue before Reyes isn’t whether Trump likes her opinion of the golf course. It’s whether his administration is following the law — and whether government officials have been telling the court the truth about what they’re doing.
Now, a federal investigation could help answer that question.
