The controversy centers on a federal restoration effort valued at more than $14 million, launched as part of preparations for the United States’ 250th anniversary celebrations. The project sought to transform the Reflecting Pool by introducing a blue-colored lining intended to enhance reflections of the Washington Monument.

Soon after the refurbished pool was unveiled, however, algae growth reportedly turned the water green, prompting maintenance crews to apply chemical treatments. The measures were followed by reports that sections of the blue coating began peeling from the bottom and sides of the pool, drawing public attention and media scrutiny.

In posts on his social media platform, Trump alleged that vandals had damaged both the pool and surrounding grounds. He claimed that grass near the site had been destroyed and that individuals had attempted to damage the newly installed interior surface.

Federal agencies responsible for maintaining and securing the National Mall, including the U.S. Park Police, the National Park Service and the Department of the Interior, did not immediately respond to requests for comment regarding the allegations.

Trump later stated that Park Police had arrested multiple individuals in connection with vandalism at the Reflecting Pool, describing the incidents as serious crimes involving national monuments. No official details regarding arrests or charges were released.

One individual identified as having been detained was David Hearn, a 67-year-old resident of Bethesda, Maryland, and former Olympic canoe racer. Hearn told The Associated Press that he stopped at the Reflecting Pool during a bicycle ride and briefly touched a section of the peeling coating to examine its texture.

According to Hearn, he immediately withdrew after being instructed by a park employee but was subsequently detained by National Guard personnel and Park Police for approximately five hours before being released. He said he had been ordered to appear in court next month.

Hearn denied causing damage to the site, describing himself as a curious visitor interested in observing the renovation work. He said the material he touched appeared soft and rubber-like.

The reported detention came as public attention focused on visible deterioration at the recently refurbished pool, including algae accumulation and peeling sections of the blue lining. The causes of those issues have not been officially determined.

Trump also suggested that unidentified individuals may have used chemicals to damage the site, drawing a comparison to a separate incident involving discolored grass on the National Mall where the numbers “86 47” appeared. Authorities have said they are investigating that matter, which some interpreted as a reference to the 47th president.

The Reflecting Pool project has faced increasing scrutiny in recent days as images of maintenance crews removing algae and addressing surface damage circulated widely, raising questions about the effectiveness and durability of the renovation effort.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit put on hold a preliminary injunction issued a day earlier by U.S. District Judge Richard Leon, granting the Justice Department’s request for interim relief while the appeal proceeds. The panel scheduled oral arguments for June 5 to determine whether construction should remain paused during the broader legal review.

The appeals court’s brief order did not address the underlying legal merits of the dispute, which centers on whether the executive branch had the authority to demolish the historic East Wing and proceed with new construction without explicit approval from Congress.

The lawsuit was filed in December by the National Trust for Historic Preservation against the Trump administration and several federal agencies. The group argued that the demolition of the East Wing and the planned ballroom project violated federal preservation laws and exceeded the authority of both the president and the National Park Service.

Judge Leon, in his earlier ruling, sided with the plaintiffs’ argument that the project could not proceed lawfully without congressional authorization, prompting the administration to seek immediate relief from the appeals court to avoid construction delays.

The White House has defended the project as a privately funded initiative backed by donors, describing it as part of a broader effort to modernize the presidential residence while enhancing security infrastructure.

Trump has repeatedly framed the ballroom as a signature addition to the White House complex.Neither the National Trust for Historic Preservation nor the White House responded immediately to requests for comment following the appeals court’s decision issued late Friday.

The case highlights tensions between executive authority and statutory protections governing historic federal properties, with potential implications for how future administrations undertake structural changes to nationally significant sites.