This chapter analyses the legitimacy dimension of the European Court of Human Rights’ (ECtHR’s) consensus method. It pays particular attention to cases in which consensus established by a progressive Court is rather ‘constructive’. The argument relies on two models of legitimation developed by legal scholars specifically for the democratic legitimation of international and domestic courts, a ‘formal model’ and a ‘control model’. These models also provide an explanation for significant patterns identified in the ECtHR’s case law. In a number of cases, in which European consensus plays a decisive role in the Court’s reasoning, the ECtHR also refers to procedural criteria in order to determine the range of the margin of appreciation. The chapter argues that European consensus and a procedural approach to the margin of appreciation complement each other. A combined legitimation strategy, comprising European consensus and a procedural approach to the margin of appreciation opens up spaces for democratic contestation and deliberation. However, shaping its partners in a constitutional dialogue in order to increase its own legitimacy is certainly a bold move by the Court, and not without practical and normative problems.