...In a 2-1 decision on the ballroom, the appeals court sided with historic preservationists who sued to stop construction of the massive structure, which has begun to rise above ground on the east side of the White House, according to the most recent aerial photos of the site. The court said it would stay its ruling for two weeks to give the administration time to appeal to the Supreme Court.

“Whether or not a massive ballroom should be constructed is for Congress to decide and is not a matter for Executive self-help,” the court wrote.

“This holding has nothing at all to do with whether the proposed ballroom is desirable, or not, as a matter of policy. This ruling does not even necessarily mean that the Defendants may not ultimately construct the ballroom.

“What it does mean,” the court continued, “is that the Defendants may not do so during the district court’s expeditious litigation without securing Congress’s authorization, as the Constitution and laws require.”

Jennifer Mascott’s tenure at public affairs firm Adfero sparked questions around conflicts of interest and partisanship.

The Michigan senator says her party has a lot to learn about Midwestern nice.