The U.S. Department of Justice filed a brief on Tuesday defending the scheduled UFC Freedom 250 event on the White House South Lawn. Two Virginia residents, Paul Romano and Susan Douglas,claim the fight violates National Park Service rules and wastes taxpayer money, while the DOJ says the regulations do not forbid the spectacle.

UFC Freedom 250’s 4 ,500‑seat “Claw” venue on the South Lawn

The fight night will feature seven bouts inside a temporary strutcure dubbed “the Claw,” which seats 4,500 spectators. Thousands more are expected to watch on large screens set up on the nearby Ellipse, and the event will be streamed on Paramount+. According to the lawsuit, the scale of the venue turns the historic lawn into a commercial arena, prompting concerns about precedent and public‑fund use.

DOJ brief says plaintiffs’ delay is “inexcusable”

The Justice Department’s filing argues that the plaintiffs waited too long to sue, noting the event was announced nearly a year ago and the White House confirmed dates three months prior. The brief also emphasizes the “millions of dollars spent, hours of labor expended, and travel accommodations” for fighters and attendees, warning that a court injunction could jeopardize those investments.

Public Integrity Project’s broader legal campaign

The lawsuit is backed by the left‑leaning activist group Public Integrity Project, which has recently challenged other Biden‑era initiatives, including an East Wing ballroom construction and a $1.776 billion anti‑weaponization fund. founded earlier this year, the group is supported by former Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold and former DOJ prosecutor Brendan Ballou, according to the filing.

Judge Amit Mehta to weigh DOJ’s arguments

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, an Obama appointee, will review the DOJ brief and the plaintiffs’ response before deciding whether oral arguments are needed on Thursday. The judge’s ruling could set a precedent for how federal lands are used for private‑sector events.

Unanswered issue: Does the National Park Service actually prohibit large‑scale commercial events?

The core dispute hinges on whether existing NPS regulations bar a 4,500‑seat arena on the White House grounds . The DOJ asserts the rules do not forbid such activities, while the plaintiffs maintain the event breaches statutory limits. No definitive interpretation has been issued, leavnig the legal question open.

As the case proceeds, both sides have signaled readiness for a Thursday hearing if Judge Mehta deems it necessary.. The outcome will likely influence future decisions about commercial use of iconic federal properties.