What appears to be the controlling case is DC v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570. In Heller, the meaning of "Right of the People" is relevant, and the court finds that in three instances in The Constitution,
these instances unambiguously refer to individual rights, not
'collective' rights, or rights that may be exercised only through
participation in some corporate body"
However, Art. 1 Sec 2 of The Constitution says that "the people" will select members of The House, and then there is the 10th: Heller says that
Those provisions arguably refer to 'the people' acting
collectively—but they deal with the exercise or reservation of powers,
In other words, "the people" can act collectively, but "the people" have individual rights. In the remaining cases of "the people", the expression "unambiguously refers to all members of the political community, not an unspecified subset".
We are then directed to US v. Verdugo-Urquidez 494 U.S. 259, which is a warrantless search case involving a Mexican citizen and a search in Mexico, and the part that Heller finds relevant is that
‘[T]he people’ seems to have been a term of art employed in select
parts of the Constitution… . [Its uses] sugges[t] that ‘the people’
protected by the Fourth Amendment, and by the First and Second
Amendments, and to whom rights and powers are reserved in the Ninth
and Tenth Amendments, refers to a class of persons who are part of a
national community or who have otherwise developed sufficient
connection with this country to be considered part of that community."
In other case law, Underwager v. Channel 9 Australia, F.3d 361 which cites
US v. Barona, 56 F.3d 1087 it is likewise said that
constitutional rights expressly limited to the "people," such as those
created by the Fourth Amendment, are held only by "a class of persons
who are part of a national community or who have otherwise developed
sufficient connection with this country to be considered part of that
"The People" thus starts from identifying "a national community", and then if the context is about rights, each such individual has the right, but in the context of powers, the collective has it.