A Supreme Choice

President Trump vowed to choose a Supreme Court nominee “much in the mold” of Justice Antonin Scalia — and in tapping Judge Neil Gorsuch, he did just that. Long before Trump was elected, Gorsuch said he viewed Scalia as a model: “The great project of Justice Scalia’s career was to remind us of the differences between judges and legislators,” he said.

Lawmakers can rely on “their own moral convictions” and views on the “social utility” of bills, but judges should use “text, structure and history” to understand laws — putting aside their own moral beliefs and “the policy consequences” they think would “serve society best.”

Like Scalia, Gorsuch backs “originalism” (interpreting the Constitution as the Founders would’ve) and “textualism” (relying on the actual language of a law, rather than speculating on the intent behind it).

That’s important in an era when far too many judges make their own laws from the bench rather than simply decide cases.

Gorsuch boasts an impeccable résumé, having clerked for Justices Byron White and Anthony Kennedy. Affable and witty, he’s even described as Scalia’s “intellectual equal.” And the Senate confirmed him on a voice vote for his current slot on the 10th Circuit US Court of Appeals in Colorado.

Alas, Democrats have vowed to block anyone but the nominee President Barack Obama pushed last year, Judge Merrick Garland. Too bad. Gorsuch is undeniably qualified, and he’d merely preserve the left-right balance of a high court that ruled in favor of gay marriage and upheld the ObamaCare law.

The sooner Dems drop the politics and let Gorsuch go through, the better for the entire nation.