I’m a bit concerned about him myself.
However, when it comes to social issues, very few of those belong in the federal court system. Certainly not in the Supreme Court. Most of the social issue cases that make it to SCOTUS have no business being there. They involve matters that the Constitution gave to the states.
Marriage laws are a good example. The individual states regulate marriage which is why you have a lack of uniformity in age of consent, blood tests, waiting periods, etc. Fine. All proper. People of the state can pressure their legislature to change it whenever they want.
If the issue becomes of national interest, a Constitutional amendment will be required.
So if Gorsuch is a true Constitutionalist, he’ll be voting to kick social issue cases back down to the state trial courts.
It’s also looking like some of those on the left are due to fade into that good night soon, as well. If their replacements were all Gorsuches, we could do worse. Donald wants someone who will play ball with his agenda. That might include a paleoconservative tendency to do just what you suggested, to let lower issues be lower issues. No grandstanding like what brought us national “gay marriage.” Which if we want it to be gone, like Dred Scott, will need the gumption to muster up a full constitutional amendment now.
All of those social issues that have been in the court are a result of Earl Warren thinking the 14th Amendment was about a right to privacy and not stopping states from discriminating against newly freed slaves.
How can we not be concerned about the long term future rulings of a Judge?
Reagan put in one that wasn’t the best as did Bush. I think all wanted conservative justices and thought they were putting one in.
Roberts is a good example.
Yeah, we should be worried despite what anyone thinks they know about justices. We can see a liberal, but not Rinos.