This essay reviews Dennis Baker's Not Quite Supreme: The Courts and Coordinate Constitutional Interpretation (McGill-Queen's University Press, 2010). Baker's book should surprise those legal scholars too keen to dismiss coordinate constitutionalism as irrelevant or misdirected. While Baker’s ultimate claim may fall short, his book offers an intriguing account of Canada’s constitutional separation of powers and hints at the productive possibilities of coordinate interpretation. Baker’s Not Quite Supreme may not quite convince but it nonetheless contributes important ideas to the ongoing debate among disciplines about democracy, judicial review, and the Charter.