A federal judge has declined an emergency request by two Virginia residents seeking to stop President Donald Trump from hosting a UFC event at the White House this weekend, ruling that the plaintiffs lack legal standing.
The decision, issued Friday by US District Judge Amit P. Mehta, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, came in response to a lawsuit filed last weekend by two Virginia residents.
They argued that the privately organised UFC event cannot lawfully be staged on the White House South Lawn or at the Lincoln Memorial, where additional activities are planned ahead of Sunday’s main fight.
Judge Mehta concluded that the plaintiffs did not have the legal right, known as “standing”—to pursue the case, and therefore did not rule on whether the event itself is lawful.
He also acknowledged the government’s argument that halting the event at the last minute would cause significant harm to multiple parties involved, including Trump, the fighters, and thousands of attendees.
“And then there is the $60 million that the UFC and UFC-affiliated organizations have expended to put on the event,” the judge wrote. “The potential loss of those dollars resulting from a last-minute, court-ordered stoppage cannot be ignored.”
The lawsuit was brought by a political activist and a Vietnam War veteran, who claimed the event is being improperly justified under a federal rule linked to celebrations marking America’s 250th anniversary.
That rule allows certain exemptions from standard permitting requirements for official commemorative activities.
However, the plaintiffs argue the UFC event is not genuinely tied to the anniversary and instead serves other purposes, including celebrating Trump’s birthday, which also falls on Sunday.
They contend that organisers should have been required to follow standard regulatory processes, such as environmental assessments, before proceeding.
“The event is neither ‘for the celebration of the 250th anniversary of American Independence’ nor, crucially, being ‘planned, organized, and executed’ by the federal government,” lawyers for the plaintiffs wrote in court filings.
They also stressed that the event is largely being run by private entities and is not an official government function. According to their argument, the arrangement could financially benefit Trump, who reportedly holds stock in UFC’s parent company.
The plaintiffs had asked the court to temporarily block the event while the broader case proceeds.
Court documents submitted by the Trump administration state that UFC has spent more than $60 million preparing for the event.
The organisation is handling “production, labor, construction, and promotion costs,” while federal authorities are providing “emergency equipment and services, including first aid/medical services, law enforcement, and security,” according to White House management and administration director Joshua Fisher. That includes “a substantial volume of perishable food items for the anticipated 4,000 South Lawn guests and over 120,000 Ellipse guests.”
Separately, the administration has pushed back against claims that federal permitting laws were violated.
Justice Department lawyers argued that the rule cited by the plaintiffs does not require congressional approval for temporary installations on White House grounds.
“Temporary structures are ubiquitous on the White House grounds, erected for nearly every special event, yet nobody has ever before suggested that Congress somehow needs to pass legislation for every concert tent or Easter egg roll kiosk,” DOJ argued.
Officials said dismantling of the large “claw” structure used for the event is expected to begin on Monday.
