Constitutions represent symbolically constituted ideas of order, but as such lack specificity and definition. When conflict arises, the constitutional court must step in to determine the concrete interpretation and meaning. Over the course of court debate and decision-making/ the ideas of constitutional order thus take on concrete form in both the symbolic and instrumental dimensions of constitutional law. The author argues that the analysis of the acceptance of spedfic derisions, and the development of trust in the institution of the German constitutional court itself, are sound indicators for the acceptance and validity of ideas of constitutional order. These ideas, however, must be determined on the basis of empirical analysis. The author thus introduces a multi-level empirical research design drawing on an analysis of the FAZ and SZ and presents some initialfindings.