Contemporary constitutional theorists sometimes use the phrase “the constituent power of the people” in a way that is, on closer examination, ambiguous. It could mean that the people is the bearer of constituent power, that the people exercises constituent power, or both. This article examines this pivotal, yet rarely explicitly thematized, distinction internal to the concept of constituent power and considers its downstream implications for constitutional theory. The proposition that the people is the bearer of constituent power, I argue, is best read narrowly as a claim about the proper subject of attribution for major constitutional change. The proposition that the people exercises constituent power, however, is best read either as (i) a claim about the capacity of citizens to effect constitutional change through collective deliberation, or (ii) shorthand for the claim that representatives should always engage in processes of constitutional change on behalf of citizens. If these readings are true, the article concludes, then this has important consequences for the theory and practice of constituent power and for its relationship with political representation.

中文翻译：

---

人民能否行使选举权？

当代宪政理论家有时使用“人民的制宪权”一词，仔细审视就会发现其含糊不清。这可能意味着人民是制宪权的承担者，人民行使制宪权，或两者兼而有之。本文探讨了制宪权概念内部这一关键但很少明确主题化的区别，并考虑了它对宪法理论的下游影响。我认为，人民是制宪权的承担者这一命题最好狭义地解读为关于重大宪法变革的适当归属主体的主张。然而，人民行使制宪权的主张最好被解读为（i）关于公民通过集体审议实现宪法变革的能力的主张，(ii) 代表应始终代表公民参与宪法变革进程的简写。文章的结论是，如果这些解读是正确的，那么这将对制宪权的理论和实践及其与政治代表权的关系产生重要影响。