Lawmakers say that Mr. Gorsuch assured them during their meetings that no one in the Trump White House had asked him how he would rule in specific cases. But Democrats note that his nomination was promoted by leading conservative groups such as the Federalist Society and the Heritage Foundation. In the absence of information to the contrary from him, they say they will have to assume he shares the views of those groups on such issues as abortion and gun rights.

“His refusal to answer these questions leaves us with the inescapable conclusion that he has passed the Trump litmus test,” said Mr. Blumenthal, who, like other lawmakers, found Judge Gorsuch personable and impressively prepared.

For their part, Republicans have voiced nothing but praise for the nominee.

“I met with Judge Gorsuch for more than an hour and was tremendously impressed with his intellect, his humility and his respect for the rule of law,” said Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine. She said they had an extended discussion about precedent and that Mr. Gorsuch said he believed that “it is not sufficient to overturn a long-established precedent for five current judges to believe a previous decision was wrongly decided.” That position could be interpreted by lawmakers who support abortion rights, like Ms. Collins, to mean he would not overturn Roe v. Wade even if he were part of a majority that disagreed with it.

Kelly Ayotte, the former New Hampshire senator who is serving as Judge Gorsuch’s sherpa through the Senate process, said she found him quite forthcoming during the 58 meetings with lawmakers she attended and added that he talked at length about his rulings on the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit. “He’s obviously saying as much as he can without violating his responsibility as a judge not to offer opinions on cases that may come before the court,” she said.

In trying to forestall Democratic complaints that Judge Gorsuch has not been sufficiently revealing, Mr. McConnell has reminded Democrats of the “Ginsburg standard” — a reference to Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s repeated refusal at her hearing in 1993 to answer many direct questions on the grounds she could not “preview or forecast” her decisions.

But Republicans had their own differences in the past with the reluctance of nominees to be direct. Senator Charles E. Grassley, the Iowa Republican who now heads the Judiciary Committee, opposed the nomination of Elena Kagan in 2010, saying she failed to provide candid answers.