This article examines the normalisation of exceptions using conceptual analysis. The aim is to use a conceptual engineering approach to develop and ameliorate the concept of the normalisation of exceptions to analyse and understand threats related to emergency legislation. The argument is that the normalisation of exceptions is therefore a necessary concept in terms of constitutional resilience. However, this concept is currently defective, as it is used in research in an unclear and ambiguous manner. Through conceptual analysis, the normalisation of exceptions is refined as a process in which the scope of exceptions is expanded in a manner that violates the constitution through legislation that makes the expansion quasi-normal. The term quasi-normal emphasises that expansions of the scope of exceptions through exceptional laws does not make them normal from the constitutional perspective. After refining the concept of normalisation of exceptions, it is applied within the framework of the Finnish legal system. The article suggests that the concept is meaningful in examining Finnish legalist legal culture and can be used to identify key threats to the constitution.