Preserve the White House. And the Astrodome. They're our heritage.

In August, a federal appeals panel upheld a lower court ruling that halted construction on President Trump's White House ballroom, requiring the administration to seek Congress' approval for the project. The majority opinion for the decision powerfully affirmed a simple truth that has seemed increasingly tenuous of late, stating plainly: 'The White House is the People's House.' It's true. On Monday, without ruling on the underlying issue, the Supreme Court allowed construction to continue. But the appeals court had it right. Though presidents come and go, the White House is the permanent property of the American people. In fact, all of our public spaces and treasures are our inheritance, and as such, we should be guaranteed a say in the decisions that shape them. People care fiercely for their civic landmarks and identity. Here in Houston, we've seen this fervor in local debates around the Astrodome's future. In the same way that the White House is the People's House, the Astrodome is the People's Dome. They are both famous historic buildings owned by the people and paid for with our tax dollars. Decisions on what should be done with them should involve public comments and public input, and not be made solely by one person or behind closed doors to satisfy powerful special interests. For over two decades, the iconic Dome has been closed to the public, sitting as an underutilized historic resource, waiting to be brought back to life. Plans have spanned from total demolition to bold adaptive reuse visions. And yet it sits. Will there be an opportunity for public input before a decision is made by Harris County, the Texans and the Rodeo? When the East Wing of the White House was demolished in October of last year, I, like many people, felt a deep sense of loss. As an American, I was saddened that an iconic national landmark was so rashly being altered as the country watched helplessly. In my role as chair of the board of trustees for the National Trust for Historic Preservation, I felt obligated to help protect the grounds of the White House from further damage. Part of the very mission of the National Trust is to safeguard the country's most significant buildings, and none is more significant than the White House. As chair of the Astrodome Conservancy, our board and I have worked to promote the venue's future through preservation, development, advocacy and public programming. Last month, we took the next step toward a better process for the future of the Astrodome by inviting expertise and real alternatives. Our organization released a Request for Information to solicit proposals from developers, investors and operators for the building's redevelopment. To me, this is a model for creating consensus around public architecture. Engaging a wide set of stakeholders and imaginative investors creates civic spaces that more people connect to. This is the type of thinking that's needed at the White House too. Immediately after the East Wing was demolished, the National Trust submitted letters to the National Capital Planning Commission, the National Park Service and the Commission of Fine Arts calling for a pause in construction until the legally mandated review processes were completed. We acknowledged the utility of a larger meeting space as well as the increased security facilities underground, but raised concerns that the size of the proposed new ballroom would overwhelm the White House itself and permanently disrupt its carefully balanced classic design. When our concerns went unaddressed, we were left with no choice but to file suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, asserting that ongoing construction of the White House ballroom is unlawful and asking the court to halt further construction activities until Congress takes action. In the months since filing suit, we've all observed as the review processes that are meant to protect our federal historic resources have failed to provide the level of independent scrutiny this project deserved. A pair of reviews from the National Capital Planning Commission and the Commission of Fine Arts simply rubber-stamped the project without the level of analysis they've used before, which had so often led to more successful projects. This breakdown of regulatory safeguards has only fueled skepticism in the efficacy of our government institutions and agencies. And as the administration has carried on with construction at breakneck speed in an effort to outrun the courts' judicial review, it has degraded confidence in the power of the courts. On Monday, the administration was again successful in stalling the legal process. The appeals court decision which halted construction contained a two-week carveout allowing the administration to appeal to the Supreme Court, which they promptly did. Monday's 5-4 decision did not weigh in on whether the ballroom project was in fact legal, but it allowed construction to continue. Chief Justice Roberts wrote the dissent in this case, and reiterated what we have maintained from the start, that construction of the White House Ballroom is unlawful. It is my hope that the Supreme Court will eventually rule on the merits of the case and agree with what every lower court has found: that Congress is the only governmental body with the legal authority to approve alterations to the White House grounds. This is about more than a matter of legal authority. When we see our national heritage destroyed or altered without the approval of our elected representatives, there is a symbolism that we all sense. It makes us feel further disconnected from our American identity, which is being renovated without our consensus before our very eyes. A question often posed to me and my colleagues at the National Trust is: If Congress were to vote to permanently pause construction on the ballroom, wouldn't that just leave a mess on the White House grounds? It doesn't have to. Like the Astrodome, the answer to this question involves proposing alternatives. The National Trust has begun this process. Our research into the available plans for the ballroom has revealed how outsized the structure would be for its stated purpose and capacity. A more sensible reconstruction of the East Wing could involve a scaled-down version of the ballroom that does not overwhelm the White House itself and protects the important symbolic views between the White House and the U.S. Capitol, an essential element of the original plan for Washington, D.C. Similarly, legitimate alternatives for use and financing for the Astrodome should be seriously explored by county leadership. Before Harris County makes a final decision about the Dome, the public should see legitimate options, understand how they could be financed, and have a meaningful opportunity to weigh in. The truth is that when a select few make unilateral decisions about the fate of public spaces, the result is inevitably unpopular. A recent Washington Post-Ipsos poll found that nearly two-thirds of Americans feel negatively about the White House ballroom and the administration's other construction projects in the nation's capital. Numerous polls have strongly affirmed that the public wants to see the Astrodome redeveloped. We must not underestimate the power of national and local public opinion, and ultimately the ballot box, in changing outcomes. The beauty of the American system of representation is that elected leaders are ultimately accountable to the people they represent, and that gives me hope. Public ownership requires public stewardship. The People's House deserves it. So does the People's Dome. Phoebe Tudor leads two-nonprofit organizations. She is chairman of the board of trustees of the National Trust for Historic Preservation and chairman of the board of the Astrodome Conservancy.