CELEBRITY
🚨 BREAKING: A sitting Member of Congress just sued to stop Donald Trump from renaming the Kennedy Center after himself. Rep. Joyce Beatty, an ex officio trustee of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, filed suit saying the name change is illegal. Congress named the Kennedy Center by statute in 1964. Only Congress can change that. The Board cannot. The President cannot. A Legal Line Is Drawn: Why One Lawmaker Says the Kennedy Center Rename Can’t Happen” 👉 Follow for updates as the case unfolds.
🚨 BREAKING: A sitting Member of Congress just sued to stop Donald Trump from renaming the Kennedy Center after himself.
Rep. Joyce Beatty, an ex officio trustee of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, filed suit saying the name change is illegal.
Congress named the Kennedy Center by statute in 1964.
Only Congress can change that.
The Board cannot. The President cannot.
A Legal Line Is Drawn: Why One Lawmaker Says the Kennedy Center Rename Can’t Happen”
A new legal battle is unfolding in Washington after Rep. Joyce Beatty filed a lawsuit seeking to block any attempt to rename the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts after former President Donald Trump. Beatty, who serves as an ex officio trustee of the Kennedy Center, argues that such a move would violate federal law and bypass Congress’s authority.
The Kennedy Center was formally named by an act of Congress in 1964, following the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Beatty’s lawsuit emphasizes that because the name was established by statute, only Congress has the legal power to change it. According to the filing, neither the Kennedy Center’s Board of Trustees nor a sitting or former president has the authority to unilaterally rename the institution.
The case draws a clear constitutional and legal line between symbolic political influence and statutory power. At its core, the lawsuit is less about personalities and more about process—who gets to decide when a nationally significant cultural institution is renamed. As the case moves forward, it is likely to test the boundaries of executive influence and reaffirm Congress’s role in governing federally chartered institutions.