Since the parliamentary elections in 2015 and the subsequent change in the personal composition of the Polish Constitutional Court, this institution has been in crisis. The Court, once one of the main guardians of the rule of law and a model for the constitutional judiciary in the region of Central and Eastern Europe, has been slowly losing its prestige and privileged position. The observed changes are most often described as part of the processes connected with illiberal democracy and populist constitutionalism. However, what is often overlooked in this type of analysis is the internal perspective of jurisprudence. What kind of decisions does the ‘populist’ constitutional court issue? How does it justify its decisions? What kind of ‘theory’ does it use?