A legal battle is unfolding over former President Donald Trump’s proposed “Independence Arch,” a towering commemorative structure intended to stand at Memorial Circle near Arlington National Cemetery. The arch, which could potentially rise to 250 feet, is designed to mark the United States’ 250th anniversary on July 4, 2026. However, it faces staunch opposition from Vietnam War veterans Michael Lemmon, Shaun Byrnes, and Jon Gundersen, alongside retired architectural historian Calder Loth, who have filed a lawsuit in the US District Court for the District of Columbia. The four plaintiffs, backed by the Public Citizen Litigation Group, seek to halt the project, citing legal and historical concerns.
The opponents of the Independence Arch argue that such an imposing structure would disrupt the symbolic sightline designed to connect the Lincoln Memorial with Arlington House at Arlington National Cemetery, a view meant to embody national unity post-Civil War. The plaintiffs claim this architectural connection holds profound historic significance, and they fear the arch would irreparably alter this carefully curated landscape. This argument is bolstered by allegations that federal law stipulates the requirement for congressional authorization before the construction of new commemorative works on federal land in Washington D.C. has been observed. The Commemorative Works Act, central to their case, not only lays out the approval process but expressly prohibits such projects without Congress’s explicit consent (JURIST).
The lawsuit further details the violation of procedural norms mandated by the National Environmental Policy Act and the National Historic Preservation Act, critiquing the project’s lack of compliance with these critical statutory requirements. Plaintiffs assert that proceeding with the arch without adherence to these laws would exceed executive authority, potentially breaching the Constitution’s Take Care Clause.
Adding a personal dimension to the legal challenge, Michael Lemmon emphasizes a commitment to safeguarding the memorial space dedicated to his fellow veterans. His comments reflect a broader sentiment among the plaintiffs, who are concerned that the proposed arch would detract from the sanctity of Arlington National Cemetery.
The case underscores the ongoing tensions surrounding commemorative spaces, balancing between the desire for monumental expressions of national identity and the preservation of historically imbued sites. Whether this ambitious architectural vision will see realization remains uncertain, pending judicial and legislative review.