Golf course case: Judge orders ethics review of Trump lawyers

A federal judge said Friday she would open a formal inquiry into whether attorneys for the Trump administration crossed ethical lines during a dispute over a golf course project, appointing a special master to review whether agency officials and Justice Department lawyers made misrepresentations in court.

The inquiry stems from questions raised during a hearing in which U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes pressed Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward Jr. about how President Donald Trump's desire to turn the golf course into a world-class facility became an urgent plan. Reyes paused the hearing several times to check prior transcripts in her chambers. She wants to determine whether a National Park Service official was instructed to leave details out of a court declaration, and whether witnesses offered misleading testimony about the extent of plans in place for the course's closure and renovation.

Reyes read the code of conduct to government attorneys regarding presenting erroneous or false information during a hearing. At one point, Woodward described preparations that he said only came together this week, and included tree cutting as part of the work to close the course. Reyes responded: "News flash." Woodward then corrected himself and said the tree cutting, which occurred earlier this month, was not part of the plan to close the East Potomac Golf Links.

Reyes scheduled Friday's hearing after Trump published multiple Truth Social posts indicating plans for the golf course were in place and construction was expected to begin Nov. 15. Trump said the park would close for 15 months while the work proceeds. The posts began Oct. 18 and were followed by hearings in which officials from the Interior Department, the Justice Department and the National Park Service could not confirm the existence of the plans when questioned by Reyes. She asked whom she should trust. The Justice Department filed notice Wednesday night that the plans were real.

The filing stated that on Friday, Oct. 30, 2026, the National Park Service would submit to the National Capital Planning Commission a rendering designed by Tom Fazio for a championship-level golf course capable of hosting major events.

The golf course case was one of two matters in federal court Friday involving the administration's push to expand executive authority as Trump reshapes federal areas near the National Mall and along the Potomac River. The two projects are about three miles apart. One involves the shutdown and reconfiguration of a historic public golf course. The other involves construction of an arch that would stand 250 feet tall, 100 feet taller than the distance from the base of the Statue of Liberty to the top of its torch.

Three courtrooms away, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan was scheduled to hear a motion seeking to halt construction planned as early as Nov. 5 on the memorial arch. The plaintiffs, a small group of veterans and an architectural historian, sued in federal court in Washington and argued that Congress must endorse the project. In seeking the injunction, they wrote: "The public interest leans heavily against allowing defendants to blaze ahead." They added that the court should block construction so that the defendants cannot render the arch a fait accompli before a final determination.

David Super, a law professor at Georgetown University Law Center, said past administrations pursued legal theories that were sometimes legally sound and sometimes not. "But there was always the assumption that you would try to do things that was legal," Super said. "What we're seeing here now is that if you think the federal courts can't stop you, you can break the law." Super said that is "going to do long-term damage to the country."

Reyes had previously rejected numerous motions from plaintiffs asking her to step in, saying she trusted the government attorneys. The special master appointment marks a shift in that posture.