The Kennedy Center was never intended to be simply another Washington theater.
Created by Congress in 1958 as the National Cultural Center, it became, after President John F. Kennedy’s assassination, both America’s national home for the performing arts and a living memorial to the slain president. Since opening in 1971, it has represented something deliberately larger than the politics or personalities of any particular administration.
That history makes the extraordinary events now surrounding the Center especially consequential.
The Kennedy Center has genuine problems. Its finances are precarious. Its aging building needs extensive work. A section of ceiling recently collapsed in the Grand Foyer, and officials have identified additional water-related deterioration. Its board has now voted to close the main building immediately for approximately two years, citing safety concerns and the need for a roughly $250 million renovation. Those are serious issues requiring serious decisions.
But they have become inseparable from an entirely different question: whether President Donald Trump’s name will appear prominently on the Kennedy Center.
A federal judge has now ruled for the second time that the board cannot do that on its own. Judge Christopher Cooper blocked the proposed inscription “Renovated and Restored by President Donald J. Trump” and the proposed “President Donald J. Trump Plaza,” concluding that Congress controls whom this national memorial honors.
The administration is appealing. It has every right to do so. What is unusual is what Trump says will happen if he loses.
Although the board voted to close the building and begin repairs immediately, Trump announced that reconstruction cannot begin until the naming litigation is resolved. And if the courts ultimately rule against putting his name on the Center, the renovation “will not take place,” according to Trump.
That creates a striking contradiction. The building is said to be unsafe enough to close immediately. The Center is said to be financially endangered. Its renovation is said to be essential. Yet completion of that rescue is now explicitly linked to the outcome of a dispute over presidential recognition.
The board’s own documents make the connection clearer still. They said that without “appropriate recognition,” Trump was unlikely to provide the leadership and fundraising necessary for the Center’s financial rescue.
Trump may deserve substantial credit if he raises millions of dollars and successfully oversees the restoration. There are perfectly legitimate ways to recognize that contribution.
But preservation of the Kennedy Center and recognition of Donald Trump are separate questions. One concerns the future of a national institution. The other concerns how a sitting president should be honored for helping it.
The courts can decide what the law permits. Congress can decide whether additional recognition is warranted. The board can determine how best to repair and operate the building. But the Kennedy Center should not have to await resolution of a naming dispute to determine whether it has a future.
Presidents come and go. The Kennedy Center was built to endure.
