Who gets to decide the future of the living memorial to former President John F. Kennedy, and who holds those decision-makers to account?

This debate is becoming ever more fraught. A photo taken on Sept. 16, 2026, showed President Donald J. Trump in Air Force One reviewing a poster with the words “Kennedy Center DEMOLISH …” that many interpreted to mean “demolished.”

The image spread quickly. Like the protests that brought throngs of arts lovers to the center a few days later, it amplified the drama around the fate of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C. For more than a half-century, the multivenue complex has featured world-class symphonies, operas, dance and theater performances, along with education programs.

Whether it would be open or closed to the public, active or dormant, repaired or dismantled, solvent or bankrupt and if it can include Trump’s name in its branding have been the subjects of widespread dispute and speculation since Trump returned to office.

As a professor and scholar of arts management, I can explain why the official answers to who gets to decide and who is supposed to hold those deciders accountable are reasonably clear.

Oversight hierarchy collapsed

Congress created the Kennedy Center and determines its governance. It’s up to lawmakers, through their power of the purse, to decide on funding for construction, repairs and a portion of its operational budget.

The oversight of facilities and programs falls to a board of trustees that’s authorized by Congress to advance the mission and secure the majority of the center’s earned and contributed revenue. And those operations are, in turn, subject to review by the Internal Revenue Service, which determines the center’s nonprofit status, and federal courts, which determine its compliance with the law.

So how did that hierarchy of oversight essentially collapse into a shouting match between Trump and Rep. Joyce Beatty, an Ohio Democrat, and result in two ongoing lawsuits in U.S. District Court?

Beatty filed one of the suits and a consortium of architects and preservationists filed the other. The same judge, Christopher R. Cooper, is presiding over both cases.

Presidential control

The main cause of what I would call a governance failure is that most of those official oversight authorities now serve at the pleasure of the president.

In 2025, the Republican-controlled Congress approved US$257 million for “necessary expenses for capital repair, restoration, maintenance backlog, and security structures” at the Kennedy Center. But most GOP legislators have remained silent about its oversight, including multiple attempts to affix Trump’s name to the building – which Judge Cooper keeps insisting is something only Congress can allow.

Trump has chaired its board of trustees and appointed the vast majority of its members since an unprecedented restructuring to the previously bipartisan board in February 2025.

In his May 2026 ruling, Judge Cooper found the board of trustees to be “derelict in discharging the full range of its responsibilities to the Center.” More recently, the DC Preservation League has suggested removal of the trustees and appointment of a receiver if current leadership “is unwilling or unable to exercise its fiduciary duty.”

Agencies aren’t responding

With both Congress and the trustees aligned with Trump, there are several federal agencies that could be stepping in to critique the board or its decisions: the Internal Revenue Service, the Justice Department, the Office of Management and Budget and others.

But they are all cooperating with the White House in a dramatic consolidation of power by the executive branch that now reaches into traditionally independent federal agencies.

That leaves the federal courts, where Beatty is among the few with standing to sue. She is an ex officio member of the board, meaning that she serves by virtue of her role in Congress. She also is willing to stand up and challenge the Trump administration’s attempt to direct – and perhaps even demolish – the Kennedy Center.

Even as these and other construction-related lawsuits are pending, the Trump administration has proven its willingness and ability to build, renovate or destroy federal landmarks without clear authority to do so.

Trump had the White House East Wing demolished in October 2025 without getting Congress to sign off or sharing those plans in advance. And he has built a new helipad on White House grounds, to name two examples.

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts has called Trump’s attempt to build a ballroom where the East Wing used to stand without congressional authorization “likely unlawful.” And yet, construction continues.

Who decides?

The buildings on the Kennedy Center campus are only part of what’s at stake.

The Kennedy Center was established as a “living memorial” to former President John F. Kennedy. The “memorial” part is largely associated with the physical campus and its many engravings and artworks honoring Kennedy.

But the “living” component manifests in its live performances, original productions, educational programming, artistic leadership and what audiences, educators and students experience both within and beyond the campus walls.

There were early indicators that both programs and public engagement were faltering under the board’s new leadership. Revenue from performances began a steep decline after Trump’s takeover in February 2025, well before he announced his intention to close the center for major repairs. It wasn’t just audiences turning away – many artists also canceled their engagements or stopped making customary bookings.

Prior to that takeover, The Washington Post has reported, the center’s finances had become increasingly strong as it recovered from the disruptions that all arts venues suffered during the COVID-19 pandemic.

So, who gets to decide the future of this living memorial to a revered slain president? In the short term, it’s the center’s board, chaired by Trump. And who holds those decision-makers to account? Ongoing federal court cases have constrained or delayed some of those choices. But most other official checks and balances are currently neutral or skewed in the president’s favor.

Public attention through independent journalism and citizen activism can increase friction and shape the political calculus surrounding the Kennedy Center. But any long-term solution will depend on the physical condition of its campus, its adherence to its original mission as a living memorial and the reliable, responsible and accountable governance of its leaders.

E. Andrew Taylor does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

By E. Andrew Taylor, Associate Professor and Director of Arts Management, American University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.