The Constitution treats DC as a seat of government. Congress treats it as a possession.
The District Clause lets Congress "exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever" over the seat of government. Courts have read that as plenary power — near-unlimited federal authority over everything in the District.
That reading is wrong. The clause was written to secure a capital no single state could hold hostage — not to strip 700,000 residents of the rights every other American holds.
Separate the federal interest from the municipal overreach.
The article proposes a Bifurcation Test. When Congress regulates to protect the seat of government, traditional deference applies; when it reaches the District's local affairs, it must identify a substantial federal interest tied to seat-of-government functions.
A constitutional question with a constitutional answer.
Most writing on DC's status treats it as a political problem awaiting a political fix. This article reframes it as a constitutional question — and lays the doctrinal groundwork for the next generation of DC self-governance litigation.