We’ve written many times about how crucial Trump’s choices will be in regards to the sanctity of this Republic, and who he chooses for the Supreme Court is the most important choice of all. Trump recognized that when he floated his potential list several months ago. That person will have the enormous task of filling Justice Scalia’s shoes. Remember this?

You can all have SCOTUScare. I'll take "interpretive jiggery-pokery." #scaliaisms pic.twitter.com/mDG0LdgzQk

— Caitlin Kelly (@caitlin__kelly) June 25, 2015

And this painful schooling of Senator Dianne Feinstein regarding the 14th Amendment?

So yes, whomever is nominated is hopefully one who is as as much of a Constitutional Defender as Justice Scalia was. As Jodi pointed out this morning, President Trump narrowed the field to two specific candidates; Judge Neil Gorsuch, Colorado, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit since 2006, and Judge Thomas Hardiman, Pittsburg, 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Interestingly, both potential nominees were easily confirmed to their current positions with no pushback from the Democrats. Perhaps that’s one reason why Dems are reconsidering their current stance on potential SCOTUS nominees. Maybe it’s because they know Republicans plan to gut the filibuster and deploy their own nuclear option back at them? Then again, Democrats are known for playing the long game…and we would do well to remember that with this nomination and any future nominations that may happen.

And the nomination goes to Judge Neil Gorsuch.

https://twitter.com/EdWhelanEPPC/status/826597017434599425

Justice Scalia thought very highly of Neil Gorsuch, and in fact the two shared a love of fly fishing.

Scalia and Gorsuch pic.twitter.com/PzCJ4TJiea

— Tom Giovanetti (@tgiovanetti) January 31, 2017

Gorsuch himself admits that upon hearing the news of Justice Scalia’s death while on a ski slope, that he cried the rest of the way down the mountain. In a speech last April, he called Scalia “a lion of the law:”  In that same speech Gorsuch gave us a good look at his own jurisprudence while commending Scalia for his. He notes the differences between legislators and judges stating that legislators can utilize many means to get to the end result. Judges on the other hand:

Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia: Gorsuch wrote numerous articles and a book on this subject.

In his book, Gorsuch elaborates on these ideas, proposing as a guiding principle the intrinsic value of human life and arguing that “to act intentionally against life is to suggest that its value rests only on its transient instrumental usefulness for other ends.”

Gorsuch has presided over cases involving the death penalty, religion, criminal law, administrative law, and the commerce clause. Like Scalia, he is NOT a fan of the commerce clause. For a detailed look at Gorsush’s jurisprudence, please read Scotusblog here and here. Its well worth your time.

Like Scalia, the opinions that Gorsuch writes are enjoyable to read and while not necessarily as interesting verbiage wise, applesauce or interpretive jiggery pokery anyone?, Gorsuch can get his point across very nicely.

https://twitter.com/BryanGivi/status/826525414944276484

President Trump just made good on his most important campaign promise. He nominated a man who believes strongly in adhering to the highest of legal ethics, one who is thoughtful, who will stand firm on the principles of law, and as Scalia did, will defend both conservative judicial theory and our Constitution.