The article is devoted to the sociological interpretation of the usage of the rule of law as the means of legal argumentation of the constitutional order changes in Ukraine. Functional purpose of the principle of the rule of law is to legitimate political interests when it is difficult or impossible to ensure them by the formal requirements of the constitutional legality. In such cases usage of the principle of the rule of law in the state bodies’ activity is seen as the direct regulative effect of political interests. Different approaches to the interpretation of the principle of the rule of law presented in the publications of lawyers as for the specific political and legal decisions are stipulated by political views and cultural-civilizing self-identification. At the same time usage of the principle of the rule of law for the substantiation of mutually exclusive political stances indicates social and moral ambivalence and manipulative potential of the abovementioned principle. This enables to consider terminological construction «rule of law» to be a constitutional and legal euphemism which is intended to justify political necessity of outstepping formal requirements of constitutional legality. In revolutionary situations reference to the important social interests that are loftily called «the rule of law» can legitimize formally unconstitutional decisions of the state bodies. It may be acceptable exclusively provided that such decisions are made under the extraordinary circumstances when there is no way to observe formal requirements of the Constitution of Ukraine.