The paper examines how do the national constitutional order interact with the European constitutional system. Even though there is a vast literature on constitutional identity, it is approached from the perspective of judgments of the apex courts. However, little attention has been paid to the stances of individual judges and their conception of constitutional identity. Their individual opinions are reflected in the judgments, therefore, it is worth examining how do judges envision the relations between two systems, what kind of constitutional grammar they apply to understand systems. The analysis is conducted on the Polish example and examines public interventions made by judges when discussing the Accession and the Lisbon Treaty. This could be named as an exercise in constitutional judicial imaginary, as it displays how the judges talk about, conceptualize and relate to the EU legal order. This paper is part of a socio-legal PhD project on judicial constitutional identity in Poland.