Constitutional ‘moments’, as forms of higher law-making that operate beyond the realm of ordinary politics, are inescapably linked with constitutional idolatry. The idea that a moment should be something more than a necessary, ordinary, and practical change in response to events; that a moment is something special, exceptional, even trans-formative in the life of a nation, is what sustains this connection to idolatry. This language, and more importantly this idea, has infested and dominated constitutional scholarship, perhaps to the point of no return. It has over-dramatized and needlessly immortalized what should be a routine and unsurprising feature of every state: constitutional upkeep. The more citizens disavow notions of constitutional idolatry and higher-level constitution making, the more they can actively maintain these human documents from irrelevance and antiquity, and ultimately retain ownership and authorship of the constitution going forward.