The UFC Freedom 250 is less than a week away, and it already has a lawsuit threatening its fate. This has forced the administration into scramble mode to ensure the event goes as planned. After the Public Integrity Project, a watchdog organization, filed a federal lawsuit in a Washington Court last Saturday and another injunction on Sunday to stop the June 14 UFC event from happening at the White House, Donald Trump and his administration, through its DOJ attorneys, have now asked a judge to dismiss the suit entirely.

The Department of Justice (DOJ), under President Donald Trump’s administration, stated in its response to the lawsuit that more than $60 million has already been spent preparing for the event. They also noted that over 120,000 visitors are expected to attend festivities on the White House grounds and the Ellipse.

“All these hopes could be dashed at the very last moment,” the DOJ wrote. “However, by the whim of two people who believe they have superior taste and want to spoil the event for everyone else.”

The Justice Department’s attorneys also rejected the plaintiffs’ claims against the National Park Service (NPS), which is named as a defendant in the lawsuit alongside the Department of the Interior, arguing that the agency’s permit regulations are “beside the point.” According to the DOJ, because the White House is sponsoring and hosting the events, it does not require an NPS permit to hold them on White House grounds.

The DOJ further argued that the NPS permitting framework is intended to ensure the “content-neutral treatment of events in designated public forums.” However, it contended that the South Lawn is not a public forum and therefore falls outside the scope of those regulations. The department also noted that the NPS routinely issues permits for demonstrations and special events at the Lincoln Memorial.

“It would be easy enough to simply avert their gazes for the weekend,” they added in the response. “Instead, they seek to enlist the power of a federal court to impose their idiosyncratic preferences on the rest of the country and ruin an event designed to celebrate the United States of America.”

Turning to the mandatory environmental review, the Justice Department claimed that the NPS applied an exclusion to the National Environmental Policy Act guidelines. And they contended that the event is categorized as having no significant impact on the environment. As for congressional approval for ‘The Claw,’ they claim that it doesn’t need congressional approval since it’s supposed to be temporary.

However, Trump had claimed he wanted the setup to remain on the White House grounds permanently after the event, comparing it to the Eiffel Tower. The Public Integrity Project, which represents plaintiffs Susan Douglas, an activist, and Paul Romano, a Vietnam War veteran, has until Wednesday to respond to the DOJ’s filing. 

In its lawsuit, the watchdog group argued that the administration violated multiple federal laws to facilitate the event on White House grounds. The group characterized UFC Freedom 250 as a “deeply corrupt” private commercial sporting event disguised as a patriotic celebration of America’s 250th anniversary. The lawsuit further contends that the NPS’ temporary rule permitting the event applies only to activities that are “planned, organized, and executed” by the federal government. 

According to the plaintiffs, UFC CEO Dana White himself acknowledged that the idea originated with Donald Trump, which they argue disqualifies the event under that standard. However, the Department of Justice has pushed back, maintaining that the White House is officially sponsoring and hosting the event. As a result, the lawsuit may face an uphill battle even though the event was conceived by Trump. 

The court may be reluctant to issue an injunction, making it unlikely that the legal challenge will prevent UFC Freedom 250 from moving forward. But is that really the case? What do the experts say?

Experts share opinions on UFC Freedom 250 lawsuit, as Dana White breaks silence

After the lawsuit initially came to light, a White House official dismissed it, claiming its only purpose was to stop Donald Trump from hosting “the most historic sporting events in our Nation’s history during our semiquincentennial celebration.”

Matthew Sanders, who is an assistant professor of law and co-director of the Environmental Law Clinic at Stanford Law School, spoke to USA Today regarding the lawsuit. He shared his opinion on whether the lawsuit will ultimately prove successful in its endeavor to stop the event from happening. 

“This complaint lays out in a careful way the laws that apply and how they’ve been violated here,” Sanders said. 

Meanwhile, Daniel Rohlf, another law professor and co-founder of the Earthrise Law Center at Lewis & Clark Law School, felt it would be challenging for the plaintiffs to prove their case. 

“It does raise some plausible concerns about violations of the law,” he said. “From a legal perspective, the plaintiffs are looking at a really big challenge.”

And Rohlf’s concern must be valid since UFC CEO Dana White didn’t appear all too surprised by the lawsuit. 

“We were expecting a lawsuit,” White said. “We expected everything coming into this event. We thought it would be sooner. We knew it was going to come. We didn’t know who or how, but we knew it was coming.”

From the looks of things, the lawsuit may have come a little too late. At this time, stopping the event might not be possible. But do you agree?