摘要： 合宪性解释与基于宪法的解释常易引起混淆。前者是规范审查中的一种特殊制度，它的根本目的是为了保全规范，即通过选择合宪的法律解释来避免宣布规范违宪；后者是指在个案中用宪法的规定或精神将法律中的一般条款或不确定法律概念具体化。合宪性解释包括法律解释和法律解释的合宪性审查两部分，但合宪性解释并非独立的法律解释方法，只是法律解释结果的一种选择标准或优先规则。在德国，为了避免普通法院利用合宪性解释来架空联邦宪法法院的违宪审查权，学者建议采用一种分工模式，即普通法院发现有合宪性解释的必要时向联邦宪法法院提出申请。在中国，试图用普通法院的合宪性解释来绕开全国人大常委会的违宪审查权显得不切实际。就增强中国宪法司法适用性而言，法院所能采取的路径应是基于宪法的解释。

关键词: 合宪性解释, 基于宪法的解释, 法律解释, 宪法解释, 违宪审查

Abstract: Some scholars misunderstand the concept of constitutionality of legal interpretation and confuse legal interpretation according to constitution and constitutionality of legal interpretation. The former is a special institution of constitutional review and its fundamental goal is to maintain a norm and avoid to a norm declared asunconstitutional；the latter is to concrete general clauses in law or uncertain legal concepts by constitutionalclauses. Constitutionality of legal interpretation consist of legal interpretation and constitutional review of legalinterpretation，but it is not a kind of methods of legal interpretation and only a selection criteria or a priorrule between different legal interpretations. In Germany，to prevent ordinary courts from bypassing constitutional review of federal constitutional court, some scholars recommend a division of labor between ordinarycourts and federal constitutional court. That is to say，when ordinary courts find certain legal interpretation isunconstitutional，they should petition to federal constitutional court. So，those attempts to avoiding constitutional review of SCNPC by constitutionality of legal interpretation are unrealistic. For promoting our constitution applied in justice，our ordinary courts should choose legal interpretation according to constitution.

Key words: Constitutionality of Legal Interpretation, Legal Interpretation According to Constitution, Legal Interpretation, Constitutional Interpretation, Constitutional Review