ABSTRACT
The anatomy of constitutional populism is a matter of ultimate concern to so many public law scholars these days that even approaching this topic requires a great deal of boldness. It needs to be remembered that the populist revolution relied greatly on constitutional arguments and interpretations put forward by the political branches of government and by their committed supporters – interpretations which were proposed and enforced precisely against the judges and the courts. The consistency of the approach means that actions required or justified by such an approach should demonstrate commitment to some coherent abstract principles. The cornerstone of the populist critique of liberal democracy is the profound distrust of the elites and the judiciary. At the early stage of the Polish constitutional crisis, the foundations of the populist legal philosophy were probably best explained by the late Lech Morawski, one of the quasi-judges of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal.
