22 Can Constitutionalism Constrain Constitutional Change? * Dante B. Gatmaytan ** University of the Philippines, College of Law Introduction The idea that there are substantive limits to constitutional amendments is not new. In 1893, Thomas Cooley suggested that certain amendments—one, for example, that sought to detach a part of the Union, or created nobility or a monarchy—would be inconsistent with the democratic principles of the Constitution and would be invalid. 1 The view that there are substantive limits to constitutional change is also very fresh. Recently the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated an amendment to the Constitution of Colorado that prevented the State from enacting or enforcing measures where sexual orientation, conduct, practices, or relationships can be used to claim any minority status, quota preferences, protected status or claim of discrimination. 2 Still more recently, the Honduras Supreme Court ordered the removal of President Manuel Zelaya from office after he attempted to amend the Constitution to remove term limits for the President. Honduran law permits constitutional changes but a constituent assembly can only be called through a national referendum approved by its Congress, not the President. 3 Article 239 of the Honduras Constitution also prohibits a * This Article expands the ideas originally presented at the IALS Conference on Constitutional Law, American University Washington College of Law and Georgetown University Law Center, Washington DC, United States of America, September 11-12, 2009. ** Associate Professor, University of the Philippines, College of Law; LL.B., University of the Philippines, 1991; M.S.E.L., Vermont Law School, 1995; LL.M., University of California, Los Angeles, 1996, dante.gatmaytan@up.edu.ph. I wish to thank Cielo D. Magno for her many useful comments and Sopfia Guira and the staff of the Northwestern Interdisciplinary Law Review for preparing this Article for publication. 1 JOHN R. VILE, THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDING PROCESS IN AMERICAN POLITICAL THOUGHT 158 (1992). 2 Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620, 116 S. Ct. 1620 (1996). 3 Mary Anastasia O’Grady, Honduras Defends Its Democracy, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, June 29, 2009, at A11. The attorney general of Honduras petitioned the Honduran Supreme Court for an order stopping the referendum. After review of the evidence and arguments, the court ordered Mr. Zelaya to stop his efforts to hold the referendum. When he refused to comply, the court ordered the military to remove him from office and hold him for trial. Congress affirmed the court’s order of removal by a vote of 125 to 3, and installed Zelaya’s constitutional successor