President Donald Trump’s plan for a towering 250-foot arch at Memorial Circle in Washington, D.C.—which he claims would be the largest in the world—is facing significant opposition from a group of Vietnam veterans. These veterans argue that the arch would obstruct the scenic views between the Lincoln Memorial, Arlington National Cemetery, and Arlington House—views that hold great significance in the capital.
The veterans involved in this legal dispute are Michael Lemmon, Shaun Byrnes, and Jon Gundersen, and they’re joined by architectural historian Calder Loth. They’ve been engaged in a lengthy legal battle against the Trump administration regarding the so-called “Great Triumphal Arch.”
“Our plaintiffs share a profound emotional connection to Arlington National Cemetery,” noted Nicolas Sansone, an attorney with the Public Citizen Litigation Group, representing the veterans. “In fact, two of them have expressed intentions to be buried there.”
Trump’s proposed arch is intended to be placed near Arlington National Cemetery, a site of final rest for over 400,000 military members. Critics suggest that the arch would disrespect the solemnity of the cemetery. Interestingly, the Trump administration has even recognized in planning documents that the project could “adverse effects on historic properties.”
Specifically, a report from the National Park Service states, “Such adverse effects cannot be fully avoided while retaining the location-dependent purpose of the undertaking.” This raises questions about the true impact of such a significant structure in a planned space meant to respect historic landmarks.
Sansone emphasizes the thoughtful design behind D.C.’s layout, which has historically aimed to preserve clear views from one landmark to another, like the critical sightline between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington House. “Our plaintiffs are genuinely concerned that this massive structure will disrupt a view that is historically and symbolically significant to them,” he stated.
This month, the Trump administration announced plans to start excavation work for the arch imminently. The veterans’ legal team is seeking a federal judge’s intervention to halt the project, citing the necessity of congressional authorization for its construction.
Interestingly, the Trump administration has drawn on a 1925 law meant to authorize two 166-foot columns, which were never erected, to argue that historical precedent allows them to proceed without current congressional approval. This has stirred debate around authority and transparency in such monumental decisions.
“Essentially, it prompts a larger discussion: Should such decisions about monuments and their locations come from one individual, or is it better to follow a democratic process that reflects a broader consensus?” Sansone added, hinting at a complexity that often accompanies discussions about national symbols.
The battle continues, with emotions running high on all sides regarding the significance of such structures in a city that wears its history so visibly.
