As we grapple with sources and dynamics of deep contestation this chapter turns to the Liberal International Order's (LIO) capacity to warrant institutions for normal contestation. In liberal democracies normal contestation represents a procedural element warranting recognition and implementation an order's foundational elements. From International Relations (IR) we know contestation predominantly as a practice directed towards norms. Understanding the interplay between normal and deep contestation raises a conceptual challenge which this chapter addresses by discussing the quod omnes tangit principle (what touches all must be approved by all) as a heuristic for establishing access to contestation for all affected stakeholders in global politics. The chapter proceeds in three sections: it first elaborates on the distinction between normal and deep contestation; second it presents the argument for enabling normal contestation as a procedural element, and third, it studies deep and normal contestation empirically. Contestatory practices and their normative effect are illustrated based on fundamental rights contestations in connection with the United Nations (UNI Security Council's policy of 'blacklisting' in the Kadi case.