Senate Democrats can ask Gorsuch to expand on his views of what standard has to be met for a news organization to be sued for libeling a public official, since Trump has hinted at crackdowns on news media that displease him. They can ask questions designed to gauge how he might view constitutional challenges towards national security measures undertaken by the president that appear to be intended to discriminate toward Muslims (including but not limited to the executive order, since more policies like this one might be in the offing, particularly if there is a terrorist attack). And Democrats can ask Gorsuch for a general statement of principle as to how he views the role of the judiciary in the face of naked authoritarian behavior by the executive branch.

That last bit, that overreach by the executive branch, is particularly important here. Back in the day, Gorsuch was in the "it's not illegal if the president does it" crowd. He was just a college student when he wrote that, yes, but there's been little to suggest in his writings since that he's evolved away from a Scalia-like devotion to far-right causes. It’s the kind of ideology that allows a smart justice to twist and turn the law to his own political devices. That's what Senate Democrats need to deeply probe with Gorsuch.

Because he's unlikely to pass up this golden ticket to the Supreme Court, even though he must realize he'd serve his entire term with an asterisk by his name. Being picked by what is easily the most authoritarian, corrupt, ignorant and just downright dangerous executive we've ever had is not much of a way to cement a legacy.