{"id":2125,"date":"2026-08-07T19:40:12","date_gmt":"2026-08-07T19:40:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2125"},"modified":"2026-08-07T19:40:12","modified_gmt":"2026-08-07T19:40:12","slug":"trumps-white-house-ballroom-plans-just-hit-a-major-legal-roadblock-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2125","title":{"rendered":"Trump\u2019s White House Ballroom Plans Just Hit A Major Legal Roadblock"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

A federal appeals court on Friday blocked further above-ground construction of President Donald Trump\u2019s planned White House ballroom, ruling that the administration cannot move forward with the project without congressional authorization.<\/span><\/p>\n

Read more Trump\u2019s White House Ballroom Plans Just Hit A Major Legal Roadblock<\/a><\/p>\n

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit <\/span> that Congress, not the president alone, has authority to approve the ballroom project, siding with the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which challenged the construction. The court paused its ruling for two weeks to give the Trump administration time to seek emergency relief from the Supreme Court.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWhether or not a massive ballroom should be constructed is for Congress to decide and is not a matter for executive self-help,\u201d the court wrote. <\/span><\/p>\n

The ruling, however, does not completely halt all work at the site. The panel allowed below-ground construction to continue, including work related to security infrastructure, while permitting above-ground construction only when strictly necessary to protect those facilities or ensure the safety and structural integrity of the White House complex.<\/span><\/p>\n

The decision came from a three-judge panel consisting of U.S. Circuit Judges Patricia Millett, Neomi Rao, and Bradley Garcia. Millett, appointed by former President Barack Obama, and Garcia, appointed by former President Joe Biden, formed the majority. Rao, a Trump appointee, dissented.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cEach president is a temporary tenant, not the owner, of the White House and its executive residence,\u201d Millett and Garcia wrote in their opinion. <\/span><\/p>\n

The judges argued that the White House belongs to the American people and that major structural changes require congressional approval. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWe are aware of no instance in American history in which a President unilaterally and using privately collected funds demolished substantial portions of the White House that Congress authorized to be built and American taxpayers paid for,\u201d the majority wrote.<\/span><\/p>\n

Rao argued that the courts had overstepped their authority by intervening in a presidential construction project and said Trump had sufficient authority to proceed. <\/span><\/p>\n

Read more El-Sayed Once Trashed Beloved Michigan Vacation Destination<\/a><\/p>\n

\u201cThe district court seized supervision of construction at the White House, and my colleagues affirm this judicial overreach,\u201d Rao wrote. \u201cBecause the injunction is beyond the proper province of the federal courts, construction should be allowed to continue.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Trump announced plans for the 90,000-square-foot ballroom as part of a broader effort to expand event space at the White House. Trump has said the ballroom would cost roughly $400 million and would be funded through private donations rather than taxpayer money, though subsequent reporting has raised questions about the extent of public funding for security work associated with the broader project.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The administration has argued that the ballroom is necessary for both practical and national security reasons, citing the difficulty of hosting large events in temporary structures and the need for additional security capabilities.<\/span><\/p>\n

Government attorneys have argued that the project includes protections against threats including drones, ballistic missiles, and other attacks targeting the president and White House personnel.<\/span><\/p>\n

The National Trust for Historic Preservation argued that the administration lacked authority to demolish the East Wing and begin construction without additional approvals.<\/span><\/p>\n

The White House demolished the East Wing last fall to make way for the new structure, sparking criticism from preservation groups that said the project represented an unprecedented alteration of the historic complex.<\/span><\/p>\n

The appeals court\u2019s decision leaves the future of the ballroom uncertain as the administration continues to weigh whether to seek intervention from the Supreme Court.<\/span><\/p>\n

Read more Mike Rogers Makes His Pitch For Dem Support In Michigan After El-Sayed\u2019s \u2018Divisive\u2019 Victory<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A federal appeals court on Friday blocked further above-ground construction of President Donald Trump\u2019s planned White House ballroom, ruling that the administration cannot move forward with the project without congressional authorization.The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled 2-1 that Congress, not the president alone, has authority to approve the ballroom project, siding with the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which challenged the construction. The court paused its ruling for two weeks to give the Trump administration time to seek emergency relief from the Supreme Court.\u201cWhether or not a massive ballroom should be constructed is for Congress to decide and is not a matter for executive self-help,\u201d the court wrote. The ruling, however, does not completely halt all work at the site. The panel allowed below-ground construction to continue, including work related to security infrastructure, while permitting above-ground construction only when strictly necessary to protect those facilities or ensure the safety and structural integrity of the White House complex.The decision came from a three-judge panel consisting of U.S. Circuit Judges Patricia Millett, Neomi Rao, and Bradley Garcia. Millett, appointed by former President Barack Obama, and Garcia, appointed by former President Joe Biden, formed the majority. Rao, a Trump appointee, dissented.\u201cEach president is a temporary tenant, not the owner, of the White House and its executive residence,\u201d Millett and Garcia wrote in their opinion. The judges argued that the White House belongs to the American people and that major structural changes require congressional approval. \u201cWe are aware of no instance in American history in which a President unilaterally and using privately collected funds demolished substantial portions of the White House that Congress authorized to be built and American taxpayers paid for,\u201d the majority wrote.Rao argued that the courts had overstepped their authority by intervening in a presidential construction project and said Trump had sufficient authority to proceed. \u201cThe district court seized supervision of construction at the White House, and my colleagues affirm this judicial overreach,\u201d Rao wrote. \u201cBecause the injunction is beyond the proper province of the federal courts, construction should be allowed to continue.\u201dTrump announced plans for the 90,000-square-foot ballroom as part of a broader effort to expand event space at the White House. Trump has said the ballroom would cost roughly $400 million and would be funded through private donations rather than taxpayer money, though subsequent reporting has raised questions about the extent of public funding for security work associated with the broader project.\u00a0The administration has argued that the ballroom is necessary for both practical and national security reasons, citing the difficulty of hosting large events in temporary structures and the need for additional security capabilities.Government attorneys have argued that the project includes protections against threats including drones, ballistic missiles, and other attacks targeting the president and White House personnel.The National Trust for Historic Preservation argued that the administration lacked authority to demolish the East Wing and begin construction without additional approvals.The White House demolished the East Wing last fall to make way for the new structure, sparking criticism from preservation groups that said the project represented an unprecedented alteration of the historic complex.The appeals court\u2019s decision leaves the future of the ballroom uncertain as the administration continues to weigh whether to seek intervention from the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":2123,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2125","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news-2"],"yoast_head":"\nTrump\u2019s White House Ballroom Plans Just Hit A Major Legal Roadblock - Blue Route Journal<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2125\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Trump\u2019s White House Ballroom Plans Just Hit A Major Legal Roadblock - Blue Route Journal\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"A federal appeals court on Friday blocked further above-ground construction of President Donald Trump\u2019s planned White House ballroom, ruling that the administration cannot move forward with the project without congressional authorization.The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled 2-1 that Congress, not the president alone, has authority to approve the ballroom project, siding with the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which challenged the construction. The court paused its ruling for two weeks to give the Trump administration time to seek emergency relief from the Supreme Court.\u201cWhether or not a massive ballroom should be constructed is for Congress to decide and is not a matter for executive self-help,\u201d the court wrote. The ruling, however, does not completely halt all work at the site. The panel allowed below-ground construction to continue, including work related to security infrastructure, while permitting above-ground construction only when strictly necessary to protect those facilities or ensure the safety and structural integrity of the White House complex.The decision came from a three-judge panel consisting of U.S. Circuit Judges Patricia Millett, Neomi Rao, and Bradley Garcia. Millett, appointed by former President Barack Obama, and Garcia, appointed by former President Joe Biden, formed the majority. Rao, a Trump appointee, dissented.\u201cEach president is a temporary tenant, not the owner, of the White House and its executive residence,\u201d Millett and Garcia wrote in their opinion. The judges argued that the White House belongs to the American people and that major structural changes require congressional approval. \u201cWe are aware of no instance in American history in which a President unilaterally and using privately collected funds demolished substantial portions of the White House that Congress authorized to be built and American taxpayers paid for,\u201d the majority wrote.Rao argued that the courts had overstepped their authority by intervening in a presidential construction project and said Trump had sufficient authority to proceed. \u201cThe district court seized supervision of construction at the White House, and my colleagues affirm this judicial overreach,\u201d Rao wrote. \u201cBecause the injunction is beyond the proper province of the federal courts, construction should be allowed to continue.\u201dTrump announced plans for the 90,000-square-foot ballroom as part of a broader effort to expand event space at the White House. Trump has said the ballroom would cost roughly $400 million and would be funded through private donations rather than taxpayer money, though subsequent reporting has raised questions about the extent of public funding for security work associated with the broader project.\u00a0The administration has argued that the ballroom is necessary for both practical and national security reasons, citing the difficulty of hosting large events in temporary structures and the need for additional security capabilities.Government attorneys have argued that the project includes protections against threats including drones, ballistic missiles, and other attacks targeting the president and White House personnel.The National Trust for Historic Preservation argued that the administration lacked authority to demolish the East Wing and begin construction without additional approvals.The White House demolished the East Wing last fall to make way for the new structure, sparking criticism from preservation groups that said the project represented an unprecedented alteration of the historic complex.The appeals court\u2019s decision leaves the future of the ballroom uncertain as the administration continues to weigh whether to seek intervention from the Supreme Court.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2125\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Blue Route Journal\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-08-07T19:40:12+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2125#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2125\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/19da116f8d79cf8987781569801c6b7c\"},\"headline\":\"Trump\u2019s White House Ballroom Plans Just Hit A Major Legal Roadblock\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-07T19:40:12+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2125\"},\"wordCount\":606,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2125#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/0561aab579ca6a0a5beba4dab3e3213b.avif\",\"articleSection\":[\"News\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2125#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2125\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2125\",\"name\":\"Trump\u2019s White House Ballroom Plans Just Hit A Major Legal Roadblock - Blue Route Journal\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2125#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2125#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/0561aab579ca6a0a5beba4dab3e3213b.avif\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-07T19:40:12+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/19da116f8d79cf8987781569801c6b7c\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2125#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2125\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2125#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/0561aab579ca6a0a5beba4dab3e3213b.avif\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/0561aab579ca6a0a5beba4dab3e3213b.avif\",\"width\":1200,\"height\":675},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?p=2125#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Trump\u2019s White House Ballroom Plans Just Hit A Major Legal Roadblock\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/\",\"name\":\"Blue Route Journal\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/19da116f8d79cf8987781569801c6b7c\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blueroutejournal.com\\\/?author=1\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Trump\u2019s White House Ballroom Plans Just Hit A Major Legal Roadblock - Blue Route Journal","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2125","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Trump\u2019s White House Ballroom Plans Just Hit A Major Legal Roadblock - Blue Route Journal","og_description":"A federal appeals court on Friday blocked further above-ground construction of President Donald Trump\u2019s planned White House ballroom, ruling that the administration cannot move forward with the project without congressional authorization.The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled 2-1 that Congress, not the president alone, has authority to approve the ballroom project, siding with the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which challenged the construction. The court paused its ruling for two weeks to give the Trump administration time to seek emergency relief from the Supreme Court.\u201cWhether or not a massive ballroom should be constructed is for Congress to decide and is not a matter for executive self-help,\u201d the court wrote. The ruling, however, does not completely halt all work at the site. The panel allowed below-ground construction to continue, including work related to security infrastructure, while permitting above-ground construction only when strictly necessary to protect those facilities or ensure the safety and structural integrity of the White House complex.The decision came from a three-judge panel consisting of U.S. Circuit Judges Patricia Millett, Neomi Rao, and Bradley Garcia. Millett, appointed by former President Barack Obama, and Garcia, appointed by former President Joe Biden, formed the majority. Rao, a Trump appointee, dissented.\u201cEach president is a temporary tenant, not the owner, of the White House and its executive residence,\u201d Millett and Garcia wrote in their opinion. The judges argued that the White House belongs to the American people and that major structural changes require congressional approval. \u201cWe are aware of no instance in American history in which a President unilaterally and using privately collected funds demolished substantial portions of the White House that Congress authorized to be built and American taxpayers paid for,\u201d the majority wrote.Rao argued that the courts had overstepped their authority by intervening in a presidential construction project and said Trump had sufficient authority to proceed. \u201cThe district court seized supervision of construction at the White House, and my colleagues affirm this judicial overreach,\u201d Rao wrote. \u201cBecause the injunction is beyond the proper province of the federal courts, construction should be allowed to continue.\u201dTrump announced plans for the 90,000-square-foot ballroom as part of a broader effort to expand event space at the White House. Trump has said the ballroom would cost roughly $400 million and would be funded through private donations rather than taxpayer money, though subsequent reporting has raised questions about the extent of public funding for security work associated with the broader project.\u00a0The administration has argued that the ballroom is necessary for both practical and national security reasons, citing the difficulty of hosting large events in temporary structures and the need for additional security capabilities.Government attorneys have argued that the project includes protections against threats including drones, ballistic missiles, and other attacks targeting the president and White House personnel.The National Trust for Historic Preservation argued that the administration lacked authority to demolish the East Wing and begin construction without additional approvals.The White House demolished the East Wing last fall to make way for the new structure, sparking criticism from preservation groups that said the project represented an unprecedented alteration of the historic complex.The appeals court\u2019s decision leaves the future of the ballroom uncertain as the administration continues to weigh whether to seek intervention from the Supreme Court.","og_url":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2125","og_site_name":"Blue Route Journal","article_published_time":"2026-08-07T19:40:12+00:00","author":"admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2125#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2125"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/#\/schema\/person\/19da116f8d79cf8987781569801c6b7c"},"headline":"Trump\u2019s White House Ballroom Plans Just Hit A Major Legal Roadblock","datePublished":"2026-08-07T19:40:12+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2125"},"wordCount":606,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2125#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/0561aab579ca6a0a5beba4dab3e3213b.avif","articleSection":["News"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2125#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2125","url":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2125","name":"Trump\u2019s White House Ballroom Plans Just Hit A Major Legal Roadblock - Blue Route Journal","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2125#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2125#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/0561aab579ca6a0a5beba4dab3e3213b.avif","datePublished":"2026-08-07T19:40:12+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/#\/schema\/person\/19da116f8d79cf8987781569801c6b7c"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2125#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2125"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2125#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/0561aab579ca6a0a5beba4dab3e3213b.avif","contentUrl":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/0561aab579ca6a0a5beba4dab3e3213b.avif","width":1200,"height":675},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?p=2125#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Trump\u2019s White House Ballroom Plans Just Hit A Major Legal Roadblock"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/","name":"Blue Route Journal","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/#\/schema\/person\/19da116f8d79cf8987781569801c6b7c","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"admin"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/blueroutejournal.com"],"url":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/?author=1"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2125","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2125"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2125\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/2123"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2125"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2125"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blueroutejournal.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2125"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}