Record · the original document behind a story
Defendants’ response on the recognition proposals
Published by U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on August 24, 2026.
The defendants’ conditional taken-down argument and the proposed amphitheater example.
The cited passage, with surrounding source text
… take three specific actions in order to recognize and acknowledge President Trump. In fact, though Congresswoman Beatty voted against the August 13 measure, she explicitly stated that she had “no objection” to one component of it—re-naming the Center’s grounds after President Trump to honor the work he is doing to save the Kennedy Center. Without those efforts, the Center will deteriorate further into an unsafe, decrepit structure that will be required to be taken down, with a determination to follow on what to build on the site, such as a large outdoor amphitheater overlooking the Potomac River that has been proposed, by some, for many years. Such a replacement will fail to adequately honor President John F. Kennedy, but would be simpler and more economical to build, operate, and maintain. Nevertheless, Beatty, seemingly motivated by a partisan end to ensure the Kennedy Center …
Read the original · Open the copy we saved
Where we use it
- The judge required notice before a Kennedy Center demolition · cited for the conditional taken-down argument and amphitheater example
About this saved copy
The fingerprint identifies the saved text used for this record. A different copy has a different fingerprint.
- Text fingerprint (SHA-256)
6638db2a6fa49a3e652aea6732896b72b046175dd1201ffc9dd6408424d7cce4