The Daily Caller website said the same thing yesterday, and I was discussing Judge Gorsuch’s credentials on another FR website this morning.
Interesting that maga_trump suddenly tweeted an hour ago that Gorsuch was a “dark horse” candidate and that he would be confirmed easily, assuming he’s nominated. Maga_trump is a guy “in the know” being some kind of GOP lawyer/whip. So they want the name out there.
From what I read, Judge Gorsuch, considered a highly qualified and reputed Scalia-type, would be a good replacement for the late and missed Judge Scalia.
From Hot Air
http://hotair.com/archives/2017/01/23/cbs-judge-neil-gorsuch-emerges-as-a-leading-supreme-court-candidate/
It’s worth your time to read SCOTUSblog’s profile of him. In a sea of conservative jurists aspiring to be the next Scalia, Gorsuch may be the most Scalia-esque.
With perhaps one notable area of disagreement, Judge Gorsuch’s prominent decisions bear the comparison out. For one thing, the great compliment that Gorsuch’s legal writing is in a class with Scalia’s is deserved: Gorsuch’s opinions are exceptionally clear and routinely entertaining; he is an unusual pleasure to read, and it is always plain exactly what he thinks and why. Like Scalia, Gorsuch also seems to have a set of judicial/ideological commitments apart from his personal policy preferences that drive his decision-making. He is an ardent textualist (like Scalia); he believes criminal laws should be clear and interpreted in favor of defendants even if that hurts government prosecutions (like Scalia); he is skeptical of efforts to purge religious expression from public spaces (like Scalia); he is highly dubious of legislative history (like Scalia); and he is less than enamored of the dormant commerce clause (like Scalia). In fact, some of the parallels can be downright eerie. For example, the reasoning in Gorsuch’s 2008 concurrence in United States v. Hinckley, in which he argues that one possible reading of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act would probably violate the rarely invoked non-delegation principle, is exactly the same as that of Scalia’s 2012 dissent in Reynolds v. United States.
Lots more at the link (plus a live link to SCOTUSBlog is there)