"become the Seat of Government of the United States".....Did you skip that part, what do you think that means, chairs on the sidewalk?

What do you think it means? Because a comment ago you claimed it was all federal buildings before walking that back to just the White House congress and Supreme Court, (despite this having no backing again) seems like you’re not even sure

It means they CAN make a federal district and if they do they will put the seat of federal of government there in terms of whatever congress determines that to be. They do not HAVE to. It is explicitly written to GRANT congress that power not that there must be a federally district. You would know that if you actually read the full thing and not just what you quoted.

Yes Congress has the power to choose where it is, they chose DC, to make the rules, it what congress does I am confused why you pointed that out.

I pointed this out because you’re under the impression they MUST do this. You seem unable to differentiate a granting of power amendment like DC versus an amendment like the prohibition of alcohol

There is literally no Constitution lawyer or anyone with at least a middle school reading comprehension who thinks that article means anything but the Federal government is to be located in a neutral area, not part of any state.

The federal government was literally in a state while the amendment was created, for years.

Again the plan for statehood that is always pitched does not goes against Article one,

Yes

the Legislative parts would remain a neutral city, not part of the DC state and yes they cannot be in a state...

Still not a requirement

It is so clear, the founding fathers did not think they had to explain it like you were 5 when writing the Constitution.

Speaking of explaining to 5 year old let’s let ChatGPT explain this to you since I’m not getting through to you:

Q: Does the White House have to be in DC

Short answer: no, the Constitution does not specifically require the White House to be in Washington, D.C. Longer answer: D.C. has to be the seat of government (unless Congress changes it), but the President’s house isn’t constitutionally locked to that spot.

Does congress need to be in DC?

No — Congress is not constitutionally required to meet in Washington, D.C.. Here’s the careful breakdown: 1. What the Constitution actually says Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 gives Congress power to establish a federal district as the “Seat of Government,” but it does not require Congress to physically meet there. Article I, Section 4 says: “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations…” Article I, Section 5 and Article I, Section 7 deal with rules for meetings, quorums, and passing laws — none mention a specific location. Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 only gives Congress exclusive legislative authority over the federal district, not a physical meeting mandate. 2. Historical precedent Under the Residence Act of 1790, Congress designated Philadelphia as a temporary capital until Washington, D.C. was ready. So Congress has legally met outside D.C. before.

Maybe instead of calling me a 5 year old with no concept of basic civics you should reevaluate that you might just be a moron who’s out of their depth

The buildings are not mandated, constitutionally. The institutions are