Products are selected by our editors, we may earn commission from links on this page.
A plan to erect a 250-foot triumphal arch near Arlington National Cemetery has triggered an outpouring of public opposition, with federal planning commissions fielding thousands of negative comments. The structure, which would feature a 60-foot gilded, winged Lady Liberty figure, is intended to mark the nation’s 250th anniversary. Critics have raised concerns about its height, its proximity to a sacred site, and whether proper approvals were ever sought.
The Arch Would Sit Between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington Cemetery
The proposed structure is planned for Memorial Circle, a traffic roundabout along the Memorial Avenue Corridor connecting the Lincoln Memorial and the entrance to Arlington National Cemetery. The corridor also includes Arlington Memorial Bridge, which Congress authorized in 1925 and designed with deliberate restraint so it would not break the sightline between the two landmarks. The arch, at 250 feet, would stand far taller than the bridge and most surrounding structures.
Nearly 1,700 Public Comments Came In
Before the National Capital Planning Commission convened on June 4, roughly 1,696 public comments had been submitted to its website. An AI-assisted analysis by USA TODAY found that more than 99% of those comments were negative. Commenters called the project a “vanity project,” described the arch as “ugly,” and argued it was “totally inconsistent with the American character.” One commenter, however, expressed support, writing that the arch would be a fitting way to mark the country’s 250th anniversary.
Trump Says He Doesn’t Need Congress to Build It
The Department of the Interior, the applicant on the project, stated that the arch is designed to honor the American people, strengthen national pride, and enrich the character of the nation’s capital. Trump has said that congressional approval is not required, pointing to the Interior Department’s jurisdiction over the land. Critics disagree, arguing that federal statute requires congressional authorization before a memorial can be built on National Park Service land.
A Lawsuit Has Been Filed to Block Construction
Public Citizen, a nonprofit consumer advocacy group, filed a lawsuit on behalf of three Vietnam War veterans and an architectural historian to halt the project. The suit argues the arch would obstruct a view deliberately designed to symbolize national unity following the Civil War. Congress has not authorized construction of a memorial on the federal land in question, which Public Citizen says is a legal prerequisite under existing statute. Trump’s proposed White House ballroom faces similar legal challenges over congressional approval.
Veterans With Family Buried at Arlington Spoke Out
Several veterans addressed the commission during the June 4 hearing. Gary Langston, whose parents, a Vietnam veteran and an Army nurse, are both interred at Arlington, urged that any structure built there honor those buried at Arlington, their families, and generations to come. Marine veteran Jimi Shaughnessy, whose great-grandparents are also buried at Arlington, called the arch “a profound disruption and insult at the entrance to sacred ground,” adding that it would cast a shadow on those laid to rest there.
The Arch’s Height Is Raising Legal and Safety Questions
Washington’s Height of Buildings Act generally caps structures in the district at 160 feet. Commission chair Will Scharf, a Trump appointee, argued the law applies to local zoning and not federal projects. Commission staff pushed back, recommending that the Interior Department provide a formal justification for the arch’s 250-foot height. Staff also flagged pedestrian safety and potential disruption to flight paths near Reagan National Airport, which sits roughly 3,000 feet away along the Potomac River.
The Commission Voted to Request More Information, Not Final Approval
After nearly three hours of public comment and debate on June 4, nine of the commission’s members voted to send a list of concerns back to the Interior Department, asking for additional detail before any final decision. One dissenting member, representing the D.C. Council, said the administration could not answer the more fundamental question of why the arch belonged in that location at all. Commission chair Scharf made it clear that the vote was not final approval, despite Trump later posting on social media that the commission had approved the arch.
Staff Says Key Design Details Are Still Missing
Commission urban planner Jamie Herr told the panel that the current submission was incomplete. Information on lighting, stormwater management, and site and building materials had not yet been provided, all of which the commission requires to conduct a full review. National Park Service acting director Jessica Bowron, representing Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, said she supported the staff’s recommendations and looked forward to submitting the additional information requested.
Preservationists Warn the Arch Could Permanently Alter a Historic Vista
Carol Quillen, president and CEO of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, told the commission the arch would communicate “a jarring indifference to the sacrifice of our veterans.” Edward Stierli of the National Parks Conservation Association warned that the arch would shatter the historic relationship the bridge was designed to preserve, a concern shared by several preservation and veterans groups who testified at the hearing. As of writing, the commission’s next review has not yet been scheduled.