Yeah it is against the law for private money to be raised for the gaudy ballroom:
from AI:
Under U.S. appropriations law, private money generally cannot be used to fund the construction or renovation of federal government buildings. The core legal principle is that federal spending must be explicitly authorized by Congress.
The specific laws and principles that prohibit private funding for federal buildings include:
- The Antideficiency Act: This law is the foundation of federal appropriations law and prohibits federal employees from obligating or spending funds in advance or in excess of an appropriation made by Congress. An exception is for emergencies involving "the safety of human life or the protection of property".
- The "Purpose Statute": This statute restricts the use of appropriated funds to their intended purpose. The use of private donations would be considered spending funds for a purpose not authorized by Congress.
- The "Augmentation" Principle: This concept prohibits agencies from adding to their congressionally appropriated funds from outside sources, including private gifts, unless they have specific statutory authority to do so. The purpose is to maintain Congress's constitutional "power of the purse".
and
law.stackexchange.com/...
Because the US government operates in a restricted fashion that is not analogous to the freedom that ordinary people have, in the US, government action requires authorization, hence the many opening lines "By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including..." in executive orders. So the first action mandated is that the Sec'y of Homeland Security
shall take all appropriate action and allocate all legally available resources to immediately construct, operate, control, or establish contracts to construct, operate, or control facilities to detain aliens at or near the land border with Mexico.
That means there has to be a legal path whereby resources are utilized for this project. Congressional appropriation is one path. In a few other cases, such as the Smithsonians, the laws creating the institutions not only authorized appropriations (by Congress), it also allows them through various other provisions to receive specimens, and they have the power "to receive money or other property by gift, bequest, or devise, and to hold and dispose of the same in promotion of the purposes thereof". They also have the power to "to make such disposal of any other moneys which have accrued, or shall hereafter accrue, as interest upon the Smithsonian fund, not herein appropriated, or not required for the purposes herein provided, as they shall deem best suited for the promotion of the purpose of the testator". Note that this only applies to funds not appropriated by Congress: this discretion required an act of Congress.
So in lieu of a law authorizing the receipt of donations from "the public", donations cannot be accepted. Congress has authorized a general power to receive donations to reduce the national debt under 31 U.S.C. 3113, but not to fund other projects, such as build a wall.
so the lawbreakers are:
White House releases donor list for Trump ballroom amid East Wing demolition
- Altria Group, Inc.
- Amazon
- Apple
- Booz Allen Hamilton
- Caterpillar, Inc.
- Coinbase
- Comcast Corporation
- J. Pepe and Emilia Fanjul
- Hard Rock International
- Google
- HP Inc.
- Lockheed Martin
- Meta Platforms
- Micron Technology
- Microsoft
- NextEra Energy, Inc.
- Palantir Technologies Inc.
- Ripple
- Reynolds American
- T-Mobile
- Tether America
- Union Pacific Railroad
- Adelson Family Foundation
- Stefan E. Brodie
- Betty Wold Johnson Foundation
- Charles and Marissa Cascarilla
- Edward and Shari Glazer
- Harold Hamm
- Benjamin Leon Jr.
- The Lutnick Family
- The Laura & Isaac Perlmutter Foundation
- Stephen A. Schwarzman
- Konstantin Sokolov
- Kelly Loeffler and Jeff Sprecher
- Paolo Tiramani
- Cameron Winklevoss
- Tyler Winklevoss
they need to be prosecuted for bribery!
