President Donald Trump has threatened not to reopen Washington’s Kennedy Center unless his name remains associated with the prestigious cultural institution, escalating an ongoing dispute over the center’s identity and future.

The Kennedy Center has been at the center of a growing legal and political controversy since Trump’s name was added to the building following changes made by its board of trustees.

Trump has argued that his name should remain on the center and has linked its reopening and renovation plans to the outcome of the dispute.

The development comes as the institution prepares for major renovation work aimed at upgrading its aging facilities. The project is expected to require the Kennedy Center to close for an extended period, raising questions about its programming, finances and future operations.

A dispute over the Kennedy Center’s name

The Kennedy Center was established by Congress as a national cultural institution and memorial to President John F. Kennedy. The question of whether its official name can be changed without congressional approval has become a central issue in the legal proceedings.

Critics of the name change have argued that the institution’s name cannot be altered solely by its board. Supporters of Trump’s position have defended the board’s authority to make changes to the center.

The dispute has now moved beyond a question of signage. It has become part of a wider debate over the leadership and direction of one of the United States’ best-known performing arts institutions.

Renovation plans under scrutiny

The Kennedy Center’s planned renovation is intended to address major infrastructure needs and modernize parts of the complex. The project is expected to involve extensive construction and could significantly disrupt performances and other activities.

Trump’s latest comments add another layer of uncertainty to those plans, as the future of the renovation is now closely tied to the continuing legal battle over the center’s name.

For the Kennedy Center, the controversy comes at a crucial moment as it faces both the practical challenges of a large-scale renovation and an unresolved dispute over the institution’s identity.