This article points out how the strict construction option is suitable for a man who, in his record, appears unsympathetic to others' hardship.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/a-soulless-man-cannot-serve-justice_us_58d7db00e4b0f633072b38a3?
I don't know enough about Gorsuch to know if this is true. But it could be. An intelligent and privileged man who has never suffered may lack the depth of compassion required in a supreme court justice because he hasn't his own experience to call on. Textuallism would be very comfortable for such a person.
A second concern is that he seems to have inherited his philosophy in its entirety. Looking through his biography, his position on the political and religious spectrum is evident practically from the moment of conception. So in spite of claims to the contrary, he's absolutely going to be a reliable vote on the right of the bench. Many adults reevaluate their beliefs. Not Gorsuch. Such a person likely lacks perspective.
Aside from which, in the usual Republican unmentioned (but obvious) religious test, he's a catholic. The next in a long series. So without asking the question, his position on Roe v Wade is predictable. And yet Dems cannot challenge him on this matter due to the inevitable defence that Republicans will make in an unflinchingly hypocritical way: that the Dems are imposing a religious test on applicants for inclusion on the roster.
| 