The bipartisan legislation is intended to speed energy projects, but environmental lawyers warn it could also weaken legal challenges to the president’s plans for major renovations in the nation’s capital.

By Nico Portuondo The bipartisan permitting reform bill designed to aid new energy projects would make it harder for opponents to slow President Donald Trump’s Washington makeover, environmental lawyers say.

The Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026, unveiled in September and expected to receive a Senate vote as early as next week, would limit plaintiffs’ ability to halt work on permitted energy projects while they challenge federal approvals. Supporters say those changes are needed to reduce lengthy legal battles that frequently delay or kill energy infrastructure projects amid rising electricity demand.

But those same provisions could also make it more difficult for groups to challenge and slow the Trump administration’s construction plans for the East Potomac Golf Course, the proposed triumphal arch at Memorial Circle and the Kennedy Center, among other projects, the lawyers said.

“Anything where you're altering the built environment or affecting areas covered by the National Historic Preservation Act, which of course ... there's tons of those in D.C., will be much easier to bulldoze,” said Matt Littleton, co-founder of Envolve Law and a former Justice Department counsel. “That's kind of the point of the bill.”That shows how the legislation's impacts could extend well beyond the energy sector. It could also create a political vulnerability for supporters of the bipartisan legislation, particularly Democrats, who could face criticism from constituents if they are seen as helping advance Trump's projects that have drawn widespread public opposition. Two-thirds of Americans said they were “dissatisfied” or “upset” with Trump's plans, according to July polling.

Mike McKenna, a longtime Republican energy lobbyist who briefly worked at the White House during Trump's first term, said the Washington implications could make the bill more appealing to the president, who has not so far publicly commented on the legislation.

“It's possible, and it's easy to imagine a situation where the administration leverages this bill to get their D.C. priorities through,” McKenna said.

The bill's most consequential provision for the projects in Washington is the language sharply limiting judges' ability to halt construction over alleged violations of the National Environmental Policy Act or National Historic Preservation Act as the legal challenges play out.

Under the proposal developed by Republican Sens. Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia and Mike Lee of Utah and Democrats Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island and Martin Heinrich of New Mexico, courts generally could not vacate previously granted authorizations or issue injunctions to stop construction based solely on NEPA or NHPA violations. Instead, judges could only return the authorization to the agency to correct any deficiencies, giving it up to 180 days while allowing work on the underlying project to continue.

That could significantly weaken legal challenges to Trump's Washington renovations. The plaintiffs seeking to stop the East Potomac Golf Course renovations based their recent legal challenge on allegations that the administration attempted to bypass NEPA. The lawsuit eventually led U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes to issue a preliminary injunction halting certain work at the golf course.

The D.C. Preservation League, one of the plaintiffs in the East Potomac case, said the current requirements ensure that federal projects comply with the law and that eliminating enforcement mechanisms would diminish the public's ability to hold the government accountable.

“A federal judge has already stepped in more than once to stop unlawful actions there, catching rushed paperwork and misleading claims from federal officials,” the organization said in a statement. “That only works because courts can still meaningfully review agency action, and the public still has a real voice in the process. BAAJA would weaken both.”

And on Saturday, the District of Columbia government and the commonwealth of Virginia filed a lawsuit seeking to block the construction of President Donald Trump’s planned triumphal arch on the outskirts of the nation’s capital, citing alleged NEPA, NHPA and other legal violations Dinah Bear, who spent 25 years at the White House Council on Environmental Quality and is now on the board of the group Defenders of Wildlife, said that the permitting bill would represent a huge threat to how plaintiffs challenge Washington projects going forward.

"In the context of the D.C. monuments and other architectural projects, those are the two laws that are most relevant," Bear said. "Essentially, you would not see challenges anymore to these dramatic proposals in D.C., you wouldn't see them happening at all."

Another lawyer who spent decades working on NEPA, primarily on behalf of project developers, rated the bill's changes "a 6 out of 10" in terms of their impact on plaintiffs, with 10 representing a cataclysmic change.

Jay Johnson, an attorney at Venable who represented a coalition of Utah counties supporting a rail project in a recent landmark Supreme Court case limiting NEPA judicial review, agreed that the bill would make litigation harder for plaintiffs. But he said opponents would likely quickly find ways to challenge projects through other legal avenues.

Democrats have strongly opposed Trump's renovation plans. Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.) and other Democratic lawmakers have called for congressional appropriations guardrails to prevent Trump from eventually acquiring or privatizing East Potomac. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) has sought to advance two resolutions through the Senate floor aimed at preventing Trump from demolishing the Kennedy Center or building his proposed arch near Arlington National Cemetery.