Many issues do raise fundamental questions about the constitutionality of (non)-intervention from the executive and the legislator. In most cases, it is the government who is primarily responsible and best equipped for addressing these issues in first instance, including the compatibility review, assisted by many internal and external advisory bodies or agencies. For many different reasons, additional scientific research or external constitutional advice on a regular basis is often needed. High Councils of State, advisory councils, commissions and committees or international bodies will then be requested to give advice. Special ad hoc commissions or committees are frequently established in order to give such advice equally. Recent political crises and judicial decisions do raise the question whether or not all this constitutional advice does finally make sense, and if not, why continuing or what can be done better? In order to contribute to answering these questions, this chapter will present an overview and categorization of different kinds and ways of constitutional advice and finally makes remarks about its effectiveness. It will conclude, among other things, that (meta) evaluations on the effectiveness and impact of advice shouldbestrengthened. Besides,maintainingtheconstitutionandthustheruleoflaw is not only about institutions and formal legal safeguards, but also about maintaining an enabling environment for the constitution and rule of law through the political culture. Self-restraint in the use of powers might be one of the keys to constitutional success.