The Memo: Trump plan for golf course becomes battle over court’s power A battle over a Washington golf course has turned into a fiery showdown over the powers of the Trump administration to do as it wishes and the power of the courts to constrain it. At issue is the East Potomac Golf Links, an unglamorous but busy municipal course roughly 2 miles from the White House.

Trump wants to redevelop the course into a sleeker, professional course capable of hosting top-level tournaments. But doing that, in his mind, requires the cutting down of hundreds of trees — which has already taken place, much to a judge’s fury.

Plans posted by Trump on social media on Sunday appear to also call for the destruction of a roadway around the small peninsula that the golf course dominates. The roadway is particularly popular with cyclists and runners. Adjacent picnic areas draw Washingtonians especially in the summer months. Even before Trump’s latest social media posts, conservation groups and individual golfers have sought to prevent Trump from moving ahead.

The judge in the case, U.S. District Judge Ana C. Reyes, has sought to pause major work on the course while the underlying case proceeds. Reyes plainly does not believe the administration had respected her orders. The administration seems, basically, of the opinion that it doesn’t have to.

A week ago, White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller wrote on social media, “A federal judge has no jurisdiction whatsoever over the maintenance of this course.”Early Monday morning, right before a fresh hearing on the matter, Trump declared the judge “a crazed lunatic” in a social media post in which he also mused whether she “may be insane?”The mayhem just underscores the manner in which the case has become about something much more important than the fate of a golf course.

“At a time when our country is at war and everyone is worried about the economy and high prices, the President simply doesn’t care,” Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) wrote on social media on Sunday. “He’s focused on building an upscale golf course within walking distance of the White House. And on his fancy ballroom and his memorial arch to himself.”

The case came to national attention more than a week ago, when more than 500 trees were chopped down. Video clips that went viral on social media captured many of the trees being felled, fueling the rage of Trump critics who saw the move as emblematic of his general penchant for unilaterally remaking Washington.

The destruction of the trees also infuriated the judge, who in essence accused the administration of defying her earlier requests to be kept informed in advance of any proposed major changes to the course.

She complained that the government’s actions had caused it to lose “all of its credibility with me in this case.”She also declared herself “thoroughly unamused” by the government’s actions. A New York Times report of that hearing last week noted that the judge “raised her voice at several points to near shouting level.”Things have only devolved further from there.

A Friday filing from Associate Attorney General Stanley E. Woodward sought Reyes’s recusal, asserting among other things that she had “allowed her disdain for the Trump Administration to influence how hearings unfold” and that her “behavior in this case is nothing short of egregious.”

On Sunday, the judge declined to recuse herself, in an indignant ruling that quoted liberally from previous hearings in the matter. Reyes, nominated to the District Court bench by former President Biden, suggested the administration was trying “to weaponize selective quotations to bring a baseless recusal motion” and added that “by any objective measure, the Government fails to meet the standard for recusal.”

Harry Litman, a former U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania, told this column that the judge at this point was “representing the institutional power of the courts.”Litman drew a parallel with U.S District Court Judge James Boasberg, who has tangled with the Trump administration over perceived disregard of orders he made halting deportation flights to El Salvador.

On Monday, Reyes created a stir at a new hearing by asking in open court whether other government lawyers were willing to sign on to a Sunday filing signed by Woodward alone.

The court filing contended that there was no “final” plan for the golf course despite Trump’s posting of the plans Sunday. In that post, the president stated that work would begin on the redesigned course on Nov. 15.

His post included no suggestion that this would be dependent, in his mind, on clearance from the court. Woodward further argued that the plans in any event did not amount to official “agency action” by the government, asserting: “Just as a decision to redesign all the art exhibits in a Smithsonian Museum would not be agency action, neither would a decision to redesign a golf course, or to trim trees, replace fences, expand the fairways, or mow the lawn.”

In relation to Reyes’s actions asking others in the court if they were willing to sign on to the filing, Litman argued, “She is very much trying to put space between the normal, professional staff of the DOJ and the political cadre that presumably takes orders from Donald Trump.”“I see it as an increasingly number of courts being suspicious or skeptical or willing to rule against” the administration, he added. Monday’s hearing did not produce an immediate ruling.

Plainly, Trump is not for stopping. The question is whether Reyes will force a halt regardless. The Memo is a reported column by Niall Stanage.