肯尼迪家族成员加入反对特朗普拱门的斗争，称肯尼迪墓地受到损害Kennedy relatives join the fight against Trump's arch, alleging harm to JFK's grave

One of America's most prominent political dynasties has waded into the growing fight against President Trump's proposed arch in Washington, D.C.

Nine members of the Kennedy family filed suit in federal court on Tuesday to block the 250-foot structure, saying it would obstruct their relatives' gravesites — including the John F. Kennedy Eternal Flame — at nearby Arlington National Cemetery.

"A towering arch casting shadows across the graves of our father, mother, and uncles, as well as the graves of so many who have served our country, would also cast a shadow over our democratic principles, undermining the safeguards established by our elected representatives to protect this hallowed ground for generations to come," Rory Kennedy and Maxwell Kennedy said in a statement on behalf of the family.

The plaintiffs include children of Sen. Robert F. Kennedy and Ethel Kennedy and a son of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, all three of whom are buried at Arlington National Cemetery. There is one noticeable absence: Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., did not join his siblings in the lawsuit against his own administration.

"It is unfortunate to see that some members of the Kennedy family have joined the litigation against the Arch as the project is intended to honor our heroes who rest in Arlington Cemetery," White House spokesperson Davis Ingle told NPR in a statement. "We will continue making the case for this beautiful and fitting monument and are confident we will be fully vindicated as this litigation proceeds." The Kennedys' motion, filed hours before Veterans' Day, adds a highly personal layer to the ongoing legal fight.

"[The arch] constitutes nothing less than a permanent denigration of the Kennedy Gravesites and the final resting place for Plaintiffs' parents and grandparents," they wrote in their 27-page filing. "Plaintiffs would never again be able to appreciate both sites as they always have before, and as the Kennedy family always intended." The Kennedys seek to join the existing federal lawsuit against the arch, which combines two cases: one brought by Vietnam War veterans and an architectural historian earlier this year, and another filed by the governments of D.C. and Virginia late last month. The Arlington County Board has also filed a lawsuit in Virginia.

The Trump administration has raced its arch through the federal approvals process over the past year, culminating in a final green light from the National Capital Planning Commission on Thursday. Officials had previously said they could break ground in Memorial Circle that same day.

But within moments of the late-night approval, District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan stepped in with an order blocking construction for two weeks while she evaluates the broader legal challenges.

One of the main arguments against the arch is that its construction is unlawful without congressional approval, which the Trump administration has not sought. The administration maintains that the arch is justified by a century-old authorization of two never-built columns at that same location, which did not seem to convince the judge: Chutkan wrote last week that "merely to state this argument is to reveal its flaws." The administration has also argued that the case should be thrown out because of plaintiffs' lack of standing, which was the Supreme Court's reasoning in the White House ballroom case. But Chutkan has said D.C. and Virginia likely have standing to sue over the arch, given the financial and logistical harms they would suffer.

David Super, a Georgetown University law professor, told NPR in an email that he believes the Kennedys' involvement only strengthens the plaintiffs' standing.

"I can imagine ... that a judge on any level would feel uncomfortable denigrating their concerns over their family graves the way the Supreme Court denigrated the plaintiffs' interest in the White House ballroom case," he wrote. "And coming at a time when the Administration is hinting that it might tear down the Kennedy Center, this certainly makes the President look insensitive or even hostile to his revered predecessor." Several Kennedy family members have spoken out against Trump's attempted takeover of the Kennedy Center, which is the subject of a separate lawsuit.

Arlington National Cemetery is central to the arch fight The cemetery says JFK's gravesite is one of its two most-visited locations, along with the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier.

The Kennedys explain in their legal filing that JFK's family chose Arlington as his final resting place so that his gravesite could be accessible to the public.

"President Kennedy himself visited the Cemetery and stood where he is now buried," they wrote. "The vista looking back toward the District from the spot where his grave now stands was one of his favorites. While looking out, he remarked, 'I could stay here forever.'" The grave was intentionally placed on the same axis as the bridge connecting Arlington House (the former home of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee) to the Lincoln Memorial, with Kennedy's personal secretary remarking that he was "the link between Lincoln and Lee."

Kennedy's gravesite is topped with an eternal flame, which has burned since his funeral in November 1963. The Kennedys said their ancestors were "assured that all aspects of the design would safeguard visibility of the Eternal Flame" from the bridge, even with its intentionally low profile to preserve views of Arlington House.

The arch, they say, would block those views. The Trump administration has acknowledged that the arch would disrupt the historic significance of many nearby memorials, but has said building it anywhere else would defeat its purpose.

The Kennedy complaint goes a step further, citing a recent forensic analysis by the Washington Post that shows the arch would cast shadows over tens of thousands of graves. It would darken JFK's memorial on 50 days of the year, and briefly block the eternal flame on almost half of those.

The Trump administration has said the arch will be topped with its own eternal flame, per the controversial lighting recommendations of the Federal Aviation Administration.

The Kennedys said they often visit their family's graves in the morning for extra privacy — exactly the time of day that the Post analysis found the shadows would be most pronounced.

"Plaintiffs' visits to these would literally be shadowed by the Arch, an unlawfully-created structure," the filing reads. "The shadow the Arch would leave over the Kennedy Gravesites would fundamentally alter the experience of visiting the Gravesites." Arlington National Cemetery is the final resting place for more than 400,000 service members, veterans and their relatives.

The White House has characterized the arch as a tribute to the nation's military heritage, saying it will "enhance the visitor experience at Arlington National Cemetery for veterans, the families of the fallen, and all Americans alike." But many of those veterans and their family members have spoken out vehemently against the arch: at protests in Memorial Circle, in tens of thousands of written comments as part of the federal review process, over nearly nine impassioned hours of public testimony during last Thursday's planning commission meeting.

Critics say the arch would disrespect those buried at Arlington and disrupt the solemnity of the space for the loved ones who visit them. They say construction — which the Trump administration estimates would involve 20-hour days — would interfere with the 24 to 27 funeral services held there every weekday.

Veterans have said that if Trump — who got five draft deferments during the Vietnam War — really wants to honor their service, he would stop cutting resources for them.

A flurry of court filings argue for a more permanent ban on the arch The Trump administration has also recast the arch as a military structure (on a public-facing website and in recent court filings), though the plan that received final approval last week has no details about national security. The judge did not seem to find that late-stage argument compelling in her order last week.

In a 10-page declaration filed Tuesday, a retired military general argued that the arch would actually endanger national security. Ret.

U.S. Army Brig. Gen. Steven Anderson warned that storing ammunition in a tourist attraction would constitute a "tremendous risk," and that launching drones in that area — especially so close to D.C.'s airport — "poses clear hazards" to civilians.

"Not only is the Arch not suitable for any practical military facility, but it actually degrades security in the National Capital Region by placing a high-payoff target for our enemies just a few meters from a major road network and the traffic circle that surrounds the Arch," Anderson wrote.

He pointed to bombings in Beirut in 1983 and Oklahoma in 1995 as "two examples of the danger posed by allowing vehicles within close proximity of comparable military or law enforcement targets." Anderson's declaration was part of a slew of documents that the veterans filed this week in their quest for a more permanent ban on the arch.

Democrats have also vowed to use their forthcoming majority in Congress to block Trump's construction projects and investigate potential wrongdoing.

But experts told NPR earlier this week that given Trump's veto power, Congress is better positioned to tackle that fight through oversight hearings and funding restrictions. The future of the arch, they say, will likely be up to the Supreme Court.