personally I have difficulty accepting that " originalism" as practiced by Justice Scalia and perhaps to be practiced by Judge Gorsuch, allows for consistent rigor in the maintaining of unbiased consistency.  

What originalism seems to do is add the heavy weight of a deeply held and academically researched belief espousing the limited role of the Court, as a means to shield the judge from accusations of ideological bias upon the rendering of legal conclusions that in the absence of " originalism" he would find himself just as vulnerable to as those who do not abide by it's rigid interpretations, 

" I personally do not oppose gay marriage..my interpretation of the original meaning of the constitution does".."I personally do not support the right to carry a gun on the street, but the framer's intent, even though state militias no longer exist, prevents me from denying that right" That sounds like the same old politics to me, not much different from the activism so often despised   ,