By SNN Newsroom | October 15, 2026
WASHINGTON — A federal judge has temporarily stopped additional tree removal under a National Park Service plan at the publicly accessible East Potomac Golf Course, citing concerns about whether federal officials complied with environmental-review requirements before clearing hundreds of trees.
U.S. District Judge Ana C. Reyes signed a temporary restraining order on October 13 in DC Preservation League v. Department of the Interior (No. 1:26-cv-00477). The accompanying memorandum opinion says the order remains effective through Monday, October 26. It is preliminary relief while the legal challenge continues, not a final judgment that the federal government violated the law.
What the court found at this stage
According to testimony summarized in the court opinion, federal personnel removed roughly 430 healthy, non-invasive trees on October 10 as part of a plan that could have affected hundreds more. The court said the government had accelerated implementation despite officials testifying that there was no immediate operational urgency to finish the cutting. The judge concluded the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on their claim that the National Park Service had not taken the legally required hard look at environmental effects under the National Environmental Policy Act.
The National Park Service described its work as implementing an earlier cultural-landscape report and restoring the course’s historic links-style character. Plaintiffs, including people who use the golf course, argue that the removals are connected to broader redevelopment proposals and threaten environmental, recreational and historic values. The government’s description and the plaintiffs’ objections are competing positions in ongoing litigation.
What the order does—and does not do
The order temporarily restricts further implementation of the challenged tree-management plan; it does not require replanting trees already removed, permanently prohibit redevelopment or decide all claims in the underlying case. Judge Reyes required the plaintiffs to post a nominal $1 bond by October 19. The court’s full opinion should be consulted for the exact scope of relief, including its discussion of the planned removal zones.
The next substantive questions include whether the agencies conduct additional environmental review, whether the government appeals or seeks to change the temporary order, and how the court addresses the challenge after October 26.
Primary document: U.S. District Court, memorandum opinion, October 13, 2026 (Document 79). Additional contemporaneous reporting: Associated Press, October 13.
