The constitution is open to exploitation. That is how we got where we are today. It doesn't clearly express citizen sovereignty. It is implied, but not stated. In fact, I think "pursuit of happiness" in the DoI in place of the original "Property" from John Locke on his treatise of Social Contract theory was put in purposefully by banker interests (Hamilton e.g.) as a potential exploitation.

By common law (precedence) only sovereigns can own land (own, as in can't be taken away whenever the government wants, like when you don't pay your lease payment (aka property tax), etc.). By not explicitly stating property ownership as an inalienable right in the spiritual predecessor to the constitution (DoI) it left open the opportunity for the government to be the sovereign to a vassal citizenry, even though that goes directly against the intention (or what I believe to be the intention) of the founding fathers.

This was further exacerbated in the Bill of Rights (end of fifth amendment) where it allowed for eminent domain. Eminent domain is an explicit statement of the government as a sovereign of a vassal citizenry. It is this precedence, set by the constitution that allows for all of the fuckery that has happened since. If the government is soveriegn, and the people are not, the Government can do whatever the fuck it wants. It is no longer a government of We The People (all individuals equal in legal status to the government (a group of individuals)), but a Government over We The People.

The Constitution has flaws. Its close, but it needs a little help to get to a government Of We The People.