The constitutionalisation of the European Union has since the early 1990s become a truism in European studies. This article revisits the constitutionalisation theory drawing on the insights from emerging historical research and new strands of political science research. We find that the conventional constitutional narrative is less convincing when confronted with the new evidence from historical and political science research. New historical research show that Member State governments, administrations and courts have generally been rather reluctant to embrace the constitutional project of the ECJ. Furthermore, at the level of European politics, the ECJ and its case law have far from judicialized European decision‐making to the extent often claimed. Concluding, we reject the notion that the ECJ has successfully constitutionalised the EU, emphasising instead the inherent tensions in the process, which continue to complicate the efficiency of European law

中文翻译：

---

重新审视欧盟宪法化：纠正欧洲研究中的一个核心假设

自 1990 年代初以来，欧盟的宪法化已成为欧洲研究的老生常谈。本文利用新兴历史研究和政治科学研究新领域的见解重新审视宪法化理论。我们发现，当面对来自历史和政治科学研究的新证据时，传统的宪法叙述不那么令人信服。新的历史研究表明，成员国政府、行政部门和法院一般都不太愿意接受欧洲法院的宪法项目。此外，在欧洲政治层面，欧洲法院及其判例法远未达到人们经常声称的将欧洲决策司法化的程度。最后，我们反对欧洲法院成功将欧盟宪法化的观点，