If there were any remaining conservatives who had a doubt that President Donald Trump picked the right man to succeed Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court, Neil Gorsuch should have made them believers Thursday night. That’s when the newest justice on the nation’s highest bench delivered a speech to the Federalist Society in which he threw down the gauntlet on constitutional originalism, the judicial philosophy of both himself and the late Justice Scalia. “Tonight, I can report that a person can be both a publicly committed originalist and textualist and be confirmed to the Supreme Court of the United States,” Gorsuch said, according to the Washington Examiner. “Originalism has regained its place at the table … textualism has triumphed … and neither one is going anywhere on my watch.” The Federalist Society is a right-leaning legal organization that Democrats have accused of being a secretive enclave from which suggestions for President Trump’s nominations to the federal bench have emerged. During his Thursday remarks at the Antonin Scalia Memorial Dinner at Washington’s Union Station, Gorsuch chided those pushing that narrative. TRENDING: Trump’s 1st Move After Returning to US: Tell Off CNN in Front of Entire Country “For starters, if you’re going to have a meeting of a secret organization, maybe don’t have it in the middle of Union Station,” Gorsuch said, according to The National Law Journal. Union Station, a D.C. landmark, is the chief rail station in the nation’s capital and serves as a hub for the Metro as well as a prime retail destination. He also said that if it wants to remain secretive, the society should also abandon its very public stances on our judicial system, such as that a judge should “say what the law is, not what it should be.” “You’re a bunch of radicals,” Gorsuch quipped. But humor aside, Gorsuch’s speech was a testament of fealty to the Constitution that was moving to any conservative who cares about the future of the country. Not familiar with originalism? Well, I can only assume you’re a liberal reading through this just to post an angry response and not one of our regular, well-informed Conservative Tribune readers. However, Scalia himself described the judicial philosophy best: “The Constitution that I interpret and apply is not living but dead, or as I prefer to call it, enduring. It means today not what current society, much less the court, thinks it ought to mean, but what it meant when it was adopted.” https://conservativetribune.com/scotus-appointee-speech/ The article goes on at great lengths as to what originalism is. His judicial philosophy is correct. It is right to look to the intent of the founders rather than try to bend the document to meet some progressive need of the moment.