Neil Gorsuch would not have been my first choice for the vacant seat on the SCUS, but neither would any other lawyer.
In my opinion they are all victims of a lifetime of indoctrination that the people's Constitution must be "interpreted" by a judge, and that document only means what they tell us it means.
Therefore it is not true that he is an "originalist". If he were his first statement would likely be "that's not our call."
For at least several decades the doctrine of stare decisis and following case law has lead the SCUS to usurp the Congress' authority to make law.
We have come to accept as constitutional the "rulings" of the SCUS as definitive as to what our Constitution says or means, and have given these rulings the weight of law.
None of this fits within the confines of our Constitution!
In fact, I challenge any of my friends in the legal profession to show one word in the U.S. Constitution that grants authority to SCUS to even have a voice as to what that document says or means. (Please don't waste our time with "as Judge Muckity said in Flatbottom v. Tunnel", we're talking about the Constitution.)
I'll wait.
