AT A made-for-television event on January 31st, Donald Trump announced he would nominate Neil Gorsuch to fill the Supreme Court seat vacated by the death of Antonin Scalia. Mr Gorsuch is both widely respected and solidly conservative. Like Scalia, he is a believer in “originalism”, the idea that the constitution should be interpreted precisely as its authors originally intended. Barack Obama made his own nomination for the seat last March, ten months before the end of his term. But even though he chose a moderate, Merrick Garland, Senate Republicans refused to consider his choice, arguing that the next president should make the decision. The unprecedented gambit worked.

If Mr Gorsuch is confirmed, how would he influence the jurisprudence of America′s highest court? One attempt at quantifying the ideology of Supreme Court justices comes in the form of Martin-Quinn scores, which rate federal judges as liberal or conservative by examining their voting patterns. The newest data show that the Republicans′ stalling is likely to pay off. Confirming popular perceptions, they show not only that Mr Gorsuch is expected to be much more conservative than Mr Garland would have been, but also that he sits to the right of the late Scalia and of fellow Republican appointees John Roberts and Samuel Alito. At a sprightly 49 years old and appointed to a life-long term, Mr Gorsuch could easily remain on the court for decades. Moreover, of the three oldest Supreme Court justices, two are liberals, and one, Anthony Kennedy, is a moderate. If any of them should retire over the next four years, the Supreme Court will almost certainly move even further to the right.