Story highlights Gorsuch is well qualified for the job and the objections raised by Democrats in his confirmation hearings don't hold up, says Sen. John Cornyn

Cornyn: If Democrats refuse to allow an up-or-down vote on Gorsuch, then there's no Republican nominee they won't filibuster

Sen. John Cornyn, a Republican, is from Texas. The opinions expressed in this commentary are his.

(CNN) Last week, the Senate Judiciary Committee considered President Trump's nominee to the Supreme Court, Judge Neil Gorsuch. Over the dayslong hearing, we learned who Judge Neil Gorsuch is, and who he is not.

We learned of the tremendous experience and superb qualifications he brings to the bench. He's served on the US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit for a decade; as a senior official in the Department of Justice; and for a decade in private practice. He clerked for two Supreme Court justices after getting his law degree at Harvard and doctorate as a Marshall Scholar at Oxford.

Judge Gorsuch explained to the Judiciary Committee his belief that our Constitution and laws must be interpreted based on what their texts say -- not on a judge's belief about what they should say, the whims of public opinion, or personal bias. This respects democracy and the separation of powers; gives citizens notice of the rules that bind them; and permits judges a common and neutral basis to decide cases.

Judge Gorsuch reminded the committee time and time again that the role of a judge is limited and narrow in scope -- a judge's job is not to write the laws, but to interpret them faithfully.

The hearing last week also confirmed that the arguments peddled by the left against him are total straw men and non sequiturs.

Read More