Kennedy Center Resists Commitment to Restore Programming After Judge Blocks Trump-Era Closure

The Kennedy Center's management is declining to commit to restoring shows or expanding staff even as a federal judge blocks a planned two-year closure linked to Trump-era policies. In a court filing, Kennedy Center lawyers argued the institution is not legally required to reschedule previously cancelled programming following a May ruling by U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper that invalidated several decisions made by a board dominated by President Donald Trump's allies.

Cooper's ruling in May ordered Trump's name removed from the building and blocked the closure, instructing the Kennedy Center's leadership to provide a status update by Friday. The venue said it would present the board with several renovation options for a vote in mid-July. These options range from a complete closure to partial closures allowing limited public access and programming, or phased closures focusing on the most serious infrastructure needs while maintaining full programming.

However, Kennedy Center lawyers stated the institution plans to "maintain an operational model" starting July 5, under which public spaces would remain accessible but stages would largely remain inactive. They contended that "the Court's order did not affirmatively require the Board to reschedule programming that had previously been cancelled or to seek new programming." This position has drawn criticism from Rep. Joyce Beatty, D-Ohio, an ex-officio board member who filed the original lawsuit challenging the closure and Trump-related decisions.

Beatty's legal team argues the Kennedy Center has not fully complied with Cooper's order. While Trump's name has been removed from the building, a tarp was installed to cover the areas where the letters had been mounted, with no apparent effort to remove it. Beatty's lawyers contend that allowing the pre-planned shutdown to proceed despite the court ruling would effectively close the institution, writing: "Having gutted staff and programming, Defendants believe they can sit back and allow their pre-planned shutdown to commence."

The dispute reflects broader tension over governance and policy decisions at the prestigious performing arts venue. Judge Cooper's intervention marked a significant legal rebuke of board actions tied to Trump administration appointees, and the ongoing dispute now centers on whether the court's blocking order requires substantive restoration of programming and operations.