This presentation discusses the relationship between constitutional democracy and (neo)paganism. The question of human rights protection came to the forefront in Estonia and Latvia after they regained independence (1991). The changes experienced suggest that there is a movement towards a new religious policy. That indicates constitutional challenges, because the model of relationship between legal rights and religion was so far based on the needs of Christianity. In Estonia and Latvia, these needs were defined by the Evangelical Lutheran Church. Now religious minorities, including (neo)pagans, raise objections to the religious majority model by pointing out the special rights and advantages enjoyed by Christianity. Despite shared characteristics, significant differences shaped by historical and political contexts can be observed. In Latvia, (neo)pagan groups argue that they are entitled to the same legal status as "traditional denominations" (Latvia). In Estonia, (neo)pagan groups are primarily engaged in debates concerning religious education, and the preservation of historical sacred sites. The legal treatment of (neo)pagan groups raises sensitive issues such as the legal recognition of marriages solemnised within (neo)pagan communities, the protection of spouses' inheritance rights, and the possibility of learning about (neo)pagan beliefs in educational institutions. Central is the question of granting the status of a religious organisation to (neo)pagan groups and recognising them as "traditional denominations" (Latvia), or as a "church," "congregation," "association of congregations," or "monastery" (Estonia). The legal status of (neo)pagan groups in Latvia and Estonia manifests the dilemma between the principle of equality and the entitlement to rights faced by constitutional democracies.