WHCA shooting: What’s next for the suspect and Trump’s ballroom

The upheaval of the annual White House Correspondents’ Association (WHCA) dinner by a would-be assassin has committed the Department of Justice (DOJ) to two goals: Build a ballroom at the White House, and keep the suspect detained.

Cole Tomas Allen, the alleged gunman, already faces three criminal charges that include attempting to assassinate President Trump. Top officials have signaled additional counts are imminent.

We were at Allen’s initial court appearance Monday, where we got a look at the government’s earliest findings.

Prosecutors said Allen checked into the hotel the day before the dinner, a yearly black-tie gathering of journalists and public officials. He was armed with a 12-gauge pump-action shotgun, a .38-caliber semiautomatic pistol, three knives and “other dangerous paraphernalia.”

Allen was allegedly targeting White House officials “prioritized from highest-ranking to lowest,” according to writings an administration official confirmed were his. He refers to himself in the manifesto as a “Friendly Federal Assassin.”

Newly unsealed court documents revealed that Allen allegedly discharged a shotgun, though authorities have said it’s not clear whether it was the suspect’s bullet that hit a Secret Service officer in his ballistic vest.

The attempted attack rattled the dinner’s attendees, who dropped to the floor and dove under tables when gunshots rang out and top officials were rushed to secure locations. ( Your authors, and their editor, were among the attendees .)

Allen is due back in court on Thursday for a detention hearing. Jocelyn Ballantine, a heavy-hitting prosecutor who represents the DOJ and has overseen major national security cases, including the sedition prosecution of the Proud Boys, said there is a presumption of detention.

At the hearing, public defender Tezira Abepointed to Allen’s lack of a prior criminal record as a reason he should be freed ahead of trial.

“He also is presumed innocent at this time,” she reminded the court.

As Allen’s prosecution progresses, the Trump administration has used the attack to go all in on a push to build a White House ballroom, though it’s important to note the dinner is not put on by the White House — it is put on by the White House Correspondents’ Association, which represents the journalists who cover the presidency and invite the president and his administration as a courtesy. The main point of the dinner is to hand out scholarships to student reporters and award Washington journalists for their coverage.

When it comes to a challenge to building the ballroom, the Justice Department started with the path of least resistance, but it didn’t work. They pleaded with the National Trust for Historic Preservation to simply drop their challenge, but the group turned it down.

“That lawsuit seeks to require the President to secure authorization from Congress — as mandated by the Constitution and federal law — before undertaking further construction on the proposed ballroom. The National Trust respectfully declines the invitation to dismiss,” Gregory Craig, the group’s lawyer, wrote back to DOJ in a letter.

Read the letter here , courtesy of our colleague Tara Suter.

Now, the administration has turned to lobbying the judge, lashing out at the National Trust in the process.

“They are very bad for our Country,” the Justice Department said in a court filing. “They stop many projects that are worthy, and hurt many others. In this case, they are trying to stop one that is vital to our National Security.”

The red-hot motion , filed just before midnight at the start of Tuesday, sparked condemnation from the president’s critics, who say it used over-the-top language that isn’t appropriate for a government submission in court.

It began by saying the group’s name is “FAKE” because “it makes it sound like a Governmental Agency, which it is not.” And it called the group’s lawsuit a “dangerous” one that endangers Trump’s life.

“But this did not deter them because they suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome, commonly referred to as TDS,” the filing read.

Notably, it was signed by Stanley Woodward, the No. 3 official at the Justice Department. Before joining the Trump administration, Woodward represented several Jan. 6, 2021, defendants, including Oath Keepers deputy Kelly Meggs, who was convicted of sedition but saw his sentence commuted by Trump to time served.

Woodward joined the DOJ team fighting the ballroom lawsuit just before it was filed.

The decision on what’s next will be up to U.S. District Judge Richard Leon, an appointee of former President George W. Bushwho is overseeing the case.

Prior to the shooting, an appeals court put on hold Leon’s injunction that blocked above-ground construction on the ballroom. The appeals court will hold oral arguments in June.

Dive deeper on the shooting…

• Read a firsthand account of the shooting from our dinner tablemate, Judy Kurtz.

• Read visual analysis of the shooter’s path from The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post .

• Read the account of WHCA President Weijia Jiang, who was on stage with Trump.

• More on Allen’s first court appearance and the emerging picture of his potential motivations.

Welcome to The Gavel , The Hill’s weekly courts newsletter from Ella Lee and Zach Schonfeld. Click above to email us tips, or reach out to us on X ( @ByEllaLee , @ZachASchonfeld ) or Signal ( elee.03 , zachschonfeld.48 ).

IN FOCUS

Trump’s DOJ eyes settlements with his allies — and himself

Trump’s Justice Department is scoping out deals with the president’s allies in various lawsuits against the federal government.

It most recently struck a settlement with Carter Page, who sought compensation over the FBI’s mistakes in wiretapping him as part of an investigation into Russian election interference while he served as a 2016 campaign adviser to Trump. The settlement reportedly amounted to $1.25 million.

Page petitioned the Supreme Court after an appeals court dismissed his claims.

The settlement was revealed in a filing to the justices, in which Solicitor General D. John Sauernotified them of the deal but said other named defendants are not included in it.

It includes former FBI Director James Comey;his deputy, Andrew McCabe; and other  officials.

“The United States expresses no opinion on whether the Court should review petitioner’s claim that the court of appeals erred in affirming the dismissal of his FISA claims against the individual defendants,” Sauer wrote in the filing .

DOJ lawyers have also struck settlement deals in two cases involving former White House official Michael Flynn.

Late last month, the Trump administration agreed to pay $1.25 million to Flynn in connection to a case where he pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about meeting with a Russian ambassador. Flynn brought a $50 million malicious prosecution suit in 2023, but it was dismissed by a judge.

Then, court filings showed last week that another settlement had been reached with Flynn in connection with a civil suit he filed against the government alleging the U.S. Army illegally garnished his retirement wages. It’s not clear how much the government agreed to shell out.

Trump himself is also requesting settlements.

Trump has demanded $230 million from the Justice Department to compensate him for the special counsel investigation into the 2016 election and his classified documents prosecution.

The administrative claim was the first step toward filing a lawsuit if officials don’t sign off.

It goes to a Justice Department led by some of Trump’s former personal attorneys, but the department has said it will follow its ethical obligations. Trump has acknowledged the unusual nature of the situation, saying it’s “awfully strange to make a decision where I am paying myself.”

A similar dynamic is at play in Trump’s lawsuit against the IRS over a contractor who leaked his tax return information to news outlets.

Trump, who sued alongside his company and two eldest sons, Donald Trump Jr.and Eric Trump, is demanding at least $10 billion in damages. The two sides have said they’re engaged “in discussions to resolve this matter.”

“Although President Trump avers that he is bringing this lawsuit in his personal capacity, he is the sitting president and his named adversaries are entities whose decisions are subject to his direction,” U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williamswrote in a Friday order .

The appointee of former President Obamademanded Trump and the government explain in writing next month why she has jurisdiction to move ahead. Williams set a May 27 hearing in her Miami courtroom.

“It is unclear to this Court whether the Parties are sufficiently adverse to each other so as to satisfy Article III’s case or controversy requirement,” Williams wrote.

‘Not in an April case. Not happening.’

In a few hours, the Supreme Court will complete its last scheduled oral argument of the term. Decision season is approaching fast, and the justices’ summer recess begins in about 60 days.

Lawyers who’ve argued the final batch of cases are mindful of the disappearing clock.

Lisa Blatt, who leads Williams & Connolly’s Supreme Court practice, raised the impending end of the court’s term last week as she argued a case about the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, which concerns federal judges’ power to review state court judgments.

“No, you’re not going to overrule Rooker. I mean, sorry, I don’t think you’re going to do that. Not in an April case. Not happening,” Blatt said, eliciting laughter.

Justice Samuel Alitojokingly responded, “don’t dare my colleagues.”

“OK, I’m sorry,” Blatt replied. “A little too much. I’m all yours.”

It was a rare moment of pullback for the veteran advocate, even if she meant it jokingly. With more than 50 Supreme Court cases under her belt and an 82 percent win rate, many court watchers joke that Blatt can get away with saying things at oral arguments no one else can.

Her moment stood out so much another advocate brought it up later in the week.

“Look, I’m not going to be the lawyer who stands here and tells you what the court will or won’t do in an April argument,” Shay Dvoretzky, who leads Skadden’s Supreme Court practice, told the justices as he argued a case.

“You should have been here yesterday,” Justice Elena Kaganjoked.

It became a running joke to the point where Chief Justice John Robertsfelt the need to say something.

“Just to be clear, we will take appropriate action without regard to the calendar,” he told the courtroom audience after Dvoretzky’s quip.

Regardless, it is true that the clock is ticking down. And the Supreme Court has many decisions remaining.

We’re expecting at least one more this morning at 10 a.m. EDT. Follow our live coverage at TheHill.com .

SIDEBAR

5 top docket updates

1. Comey indicted, again:The Justice Department indicted former FBI Director James Comey again after a judge dismissed previous charges because his prosecutor was unlawfully appointed.

2. Musk and Altman trial begins:Elon Musk’s lawsuit against OpenAI headed to trial beginning Monday, a high-stakes showdown between Musk and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman. Dive deeper with The Hill’s technology reporters , Miranda Nazzaro and Julia Shapero.

3. Fauci adviser charged:The Justice Department unsealed an indictment against David Morens, a former senior adviser to Dr. Anthony Fauci, over an alleged scheme to conceal documents concerning COVID-19 research grants from public inspection. His arraignment is set for May 8.

4. Virginia Supreme Court weighs redistricting referendum:The newly passed referendum in Virginia, which would shift the state’s congressional map to a 10-1 Democratic tilt, headed to oral arguments at the Virginia Supreme Court on Monday. Dive deeper with Caroline Vakil , campaign reporter here at The Hill.

5. California ID law blocked:A federal appeals court blocked a California law that would require immigration agents to wear visible identification. The Justice Department says it interferes with federal authority.

In other news

• Kalshi suspends candidates for betting on their races:Prediction market Kalshi suspended and fined three candidates — a Minnesota Democrat, Texas Republican and Virginia independent — for betting on their own races. Its the platform’s latest public effort to step up enforcement efforts against insider trading amid growing scrutiny. Some of the candidates have had very different responses .

• Prominent SCOTUS advocates move firms:Kannon Shanmugam and Masha Hansford are leaving the law firm Paul Weiss to launch a Supreme Court practice at Davis Polk. Shanmugam, who argued his latest high court case on Tuesday, in a statement to The Gavel called his new employer an “extraordinary firm with an unmatched reputation for excellence and a commitment to collaboration and teamwork.”

ORDER LIST

Cases the Supreme Court is taking up — or passing on — this term.

IN: Visa breach fines

The Supreme Court took up one new case at its latest conference. We previewed it last week.

In Department of Labor v. Sun Valley Orchards, the justices will decide if the Labor secretary can impose massive fines against employers for breaching H-2A visa rules without going to court.

A family farm argues that Article 3 of the Constitution bars the government from using an in-house system to impose the fines, asserting they are entitled to go before a judge and jury. The Trump administration appealed after the farm won in a lower court.

A decision in the case is expected by next year.

OUT: Ohio bribery scandal

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court turned away appeals brought by two defendants in a major Ohio bribery scandal.

Ex-Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder(R) and ex-Ohio GOP Chair Matt Borgespetitioned the court to review their convictions.

Householder received a 20-year sentence for a conspiracy to receive nearly $61 million in bribes to uphold a nuclear plant bailout. Borges was found guilty of participating in the racketeering conspiracy with Householder.

They argued they were legally campaign contributions rather than illegal bribes.

The court has a tendency to get involved in political corruption cases, from wiping former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell’s (R) bribery conviction in 2016 to overturning the bribery conviction for a longtime aide of former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo(D) in 2023.

But the justices on Monday turned away Householder v. United States and Borges v. United States without comment.

PETITION PILE

Petitions for the Supreme Court to take up cases that we are keeping a close eye on.

• Scope of COVID pension relief:As part of former President Biden’s pandemic stimulus, Congress created the Special Financial Assistance (SFA) program. It provides federal dollars to stressed multi-employer pension plans to help keep them solvent. This case concerns a pension fund for bakery drivers that terminated before the bill was passed because of mass withdrawals. The Justice Department wants the Supreme Court to rule it isn’t eligible for SFA. The case is Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. v. Board of Trustees of the Bakery Drivers Local 550 .

• Federal employee disputes:DOJ is also petitioning the court to hear a case that poses broad implications for federal employees. The Trump administration defends against many workers’ lawsuits by arguing judges have no authority to hear them, and the law requires they instead go before the Merit Systems Protection Board. The administration now wants the justices to put their thumb on the scale after a lower court allowed a free speech lawsuit from immigration judges to move forward. The administration says it “derailed” the case and should be reversed immediately without hearing oral arguments. The case is Margolin v. National Association of Immigration Judges .

ON THE DOCKET

Don’t be surprised if additional hearings are scheduled throughout the week. But here’s what we’re watching for now:

Today:

• The Supreme Court will hear two sets of oral arguments. In the first, the court will weigh the Trump administration’s authority to end Temporary Protected Statusdesignations in Noem v. Doe and Trump v. Miot . In the second, Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA v. Amarin Pharma , the court will weigh the legal scope of so-called skinny labels.

• Nick Reiner, charged with two counts of first-degree murder over allegations he killed his parents, Hollywood director Rob Reinerand photographer Michele Singer Reiner, is due back in Los Angeles court for a preliminary hearing.

• A federal judge in Washington, D.C., is set to hold a preliminary injunction hearing in preservationists’ lawsuit aimed at stopping Trump’s planned closure and renovations of the Kennedy Center.

• A federal judge in Massachusetts is set to hold a temporary restraining order hearing in a lawsuit challenging civil penalties imposed on migrants under the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act.

Thursday:

• Cole Tomas Allen, the alleged gunman at the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner, is set to appear before a federal judge in Washington, D.C., for a detention hearing.

• A federal judge in Connecticut is set to hold a preliminary injunction hearing in a lawsuit over the announcement that the Federal Bureau of Prisonswas terminating its collective bargaining agreement with the National Council of Prison Locals, AFGE.

• “Secret Lives of Mormon Wives” star Taylor Frankie Pauland her ex-partner Dakota Mortensenare due in Utah state court for a hearing on protective order petitions they each filed for custody of their 2-year-old son.

Friday:

• A days-long preliminary hearing in the first-degree murder case against singer D4vd, who allegedly sexually abused and later killed 14-year-old Celeste Rivas Hernandezwhen she threatened to report their relationship, is set to begin in Los Angeles court.

Monday:

• The Supreme Court will announce orders.

• A federal judge in Florida is set to hold a restitution hearing in the case of Ryan Routh, who was convicted of attempting to assassinate Trump.

• A trial is set to begin in Manhattan in a class-action lawsuit seeking to improve conditions in the temporary Immigration and Customs Enforcement holding facility at 26 Federal Plaza.

• A federal judge in Massachusetts is set to hold a postponement hearing in a lawsuit challenging the administration’s arrests of noncitizens at their immigration court proceedings.

• Justice Amy Coney Barrettis set to speak about her book, “Listening to the Law,” at the George W. Bush presidential center.

Tuesday:

• The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit is set to hold oral arguments on the Trump administration’s appeal in a challenge to Trump’s order preventing people from updating the sex marker on their passports.

• A federal judge in Washington, D.C., is set to hold a preliminary injunction hearing in a lawsuit over the Office of Legal Counsel’s new opinion declaring the Presidential Records Act unconstitutional.

• Elias Rodriguez, the man accused of killing two Israeli Embassy staffers, is set to appear in federal court in Washington, D.C., for a status hearing.

• Justice Neil Gorsuchis set to speak about his new children’s book, “Heroes of 1776,” at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute.

WHAT WE’RE READING

1. CBS News’s Mary Cunningham: The legal showdown between Elon Musk and Sam Altman begins today. Here’s what to know.

2. Bloomberg Law: IP vs. AI: A New Frontier of Legal Battles to Protect Creativity

3. ABC News’s Laura Romero and Peter Charalambous: ‘America is my home’: TPS holders face high stakes Supreme Court battle

4. Gothamist’s Samantha Max: Court cases for sleeping, spreading out on the subway surge under NYPD crackdown

5. SCOTUSblog’s Anastasia Boden: When NASA made Scalia turn on judicial restraint

Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to The Hill.