A genesis social contract, commonly referred to as a constitution, serves as the foundational document from which all other laws derive their legitimacy. In many societies, the constitution is the ultimate source of legal authority. However, the legitimacy of modern constitutions can be questioned. For instance, the US Constitution, despite its historical significance, has faced scrutiny regarding its origins and the inclusivity of its authorship. As the second foundational document of the United States, it is the oldest written national constitution still in effect. The process of its creation and ratification was arguably more legitimate than in many other jurisdictions, involving extensive debate and compromise among the states. However, many libertarians argue that it remains an illegitimate document. Their claims are based on several key arguments. Firstly, many anti-federalists did not agree with the new constitution, as evidenced by events like Washington's suppression of the anti-tax Whiskey Rebellion using militia. This highlights the internal conflicts and resistance to the centralized authority proposed by the constitution. There was significant resentment towards taxation, as people had recently fought a war against the British Empire for independence from the crown. The founding fathers then established a similar centralized authority, known as the federal government, with the power to tax people. Many saw this as a betrayal of the freedoms and principles outlined in the first constitution, known as the Articles of Confederation, fueling deep-seated opposition to the new constitutional framework. Secondly, the right to secede was effectively denied when Lincoln's Union refused to allow the Confederacy to branch off during the Civil War. This denial of secession has been a contentious issue, with some arguing that it set a precedent for the forced unity of the states. Basically, denying people the right to leave. Lastly, the constitution was agreed upon by a select group of people from the past, but their descendants never explicitly consented to it. For example, individuals born in the jurisdiction are forced to choose between paying federal taxes or leaving their homeland in search of a land of the free. This intergenerational imposition of governance raises questions about the legitimacy of the constitution in the eyes of those who did not explicitly agree to it. While these issues are significant, this article will not delve into the options for creating a legitimate genesis social agreement or a pristine genesis. Instead, it focuses on the process of upgrading constitutions by proposing an alternative to the amendment process currently used in most nation-states, which often results in the tyranny of either the minority or the majority. This alternative aims to provide a more equitable and inclusive path for constitutional evolution, addressing the concerns of those who feel marginalized by the current system. The process of upgrading a constitution is a contentious issue. Some individuals advocate for change, while others prefer to maintain the existing framework. Changing a constitution involves enforcing new rules on those who may disagree, which can lead to social and political tensions. This dynamic is akin to altering the rules of a game midway through, affecting all participants. The solution proposed is an Immutable Genesis Social Contract. This concept allows for the existence of multiple versions of a constitution, each with its own set of rules. Some individuals can choose to adopt a new version, similar to how different versions of a software protocol, like Uniswap v2, v3, and v4, coexist. This approach provides flexibility and choice, allowing societies to evolve without imposing changes on those who prefer stability. However, this solution faces its challenges. For example, the laws should be compatible enough to allow different groups live together within the same jurisdiction while adhering to different sets of rules. Historically, this has been the case, with rules often varying based on factors such as insurance coverage, wealth, residency status, religion, and even corruption. Additionally, differences in legal application based on race, gender, and age have been prevalent. Another challenge is the potential for excessive legal divergence due to branching. To mitigate this, prioritizing simplicity and interoperability between different constitutional versions is crucial. This can be achieved by ensuring that new versions accept a significant portion of the laws from previous versions, thereby maintaining continuity and reducing fragmentation. Furthermore, the integration of AI can assist in navigating the complexities of a multi-constitutional legal landscape. In conclusion, the immutable genesis social contract offers a framework for legal and social evolution, providing choices while maintaining order. It addresses the challenges of coexistence under different legal systems and the potential for legal fragmentation, paving the way for a more adaptable and inclusive governance model. This framework helps restore and maintain freedom of association, ensuring that individuals are not compelled to live under rules they do not agree with, thereby fostering a consent-based society where diverse groups can coexist harmoniously.