In his first comments at his Supreme Court confirmation hearing, Judge Neal Gorsuch pitched himself as a reasonable jurist who would do his best to uphold the rule of law without any bias if confirmed by the Senate.

"Sitting here I am acutely aware of my own imperfections," the federal appeals court judge said in his opening statement on Monday. "But I pledge to each of you and to the American people that, if confirmed, I will do all my powers permit to be a faithful servant of the Constitution and laws of our great nation."

The 49-year-old Gorsuch, who was nominated by President Trump last month to succeed the late Justice Antonin Scalia, did his best to strike a chord of unity in his testimony.

Support for GBH is provided by:

But his comments came after four hours of opening statements from the members of Senate Judiciary Committee in which Democrats made clear they believed it was not Gorsuch, but President Obama's original nominee Merrick Garland, who should be sitting before them.

The federal judge appeared nonplussed by the Democrats' comments throughout the day and the perpetual Garland shadow which hung over the first day of testimony. He's set to begin 30-minute rounds of questioning from the committee Tuesday morning into Wednesday.

Gorsuch touted his successful record as a judge on the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, noting that "97% of the 2,700 cases I've decided were decided unanimously — and that I've been in the majority 99% of the time."

And he underscored his commitment to the separation of powers, stating that, "it is for this body, the people's representatives, to make new laws, for the executive to ensure those laws are faithfully enforced and for neutral and independent judges to apply the law in the people's disputes."

"If judges were just secret legislators, declaring not what the law is but what they would like it to be, the very idea of a government by the people and for the people would be at risk," Gorsuch said.

Support for GBH is provided by:

In their opening remarks, Republicans on the committee heaped plenty of praise on the federal judge.

"His grasp on the separation of powers — including judicial independence — enlivens his body of work," committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said about Gorsuch during his opening remarks on Monday.

Democrats, however, repeatedly invoked Garland, who was denied a hearing by Senate Republicans during an election year after Scalia died suddenly in February 2016.

"I am deeply disappointed that it is under these circumstances that we begin these hearings," said Judiciary Committee ranking member Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.

She went on to say that Democrats would give Gorsuch a courtesy that Senate Republicans did not give Garland: a fair hearing.

"Our job is to determine whether Judge Gorsuch is a reasonable mainstream conservative or is he not," Feinstein continued. She then outlined her concerns with some of Gorsuch's past writings that hinted he opposed Roe v. Wade, calling the case a "super precedent" that legalized abortion and gave women a right to privacy.

The Colorado judge was introduced, as is customary, by his home state's senators. Republican Sen. Cory Gardner underscored that Gorsuch as not "an activist judge" and was well-qualified to serve on the nation's highest court.

Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet also had words of praise for Gorsuch, though he, too, decried Senate Republicans' treatment of Garland, calling it "an embarrassment to this body that will be recorded in history." However, he, too, argued that "two wrongs never make a right" and that Gorsuch should get a fair hearing.

Former Obama administration acting solicitor general Neal Katyal, a Georgetown Law professor, also spoke in support of Gorsuch, calling him a "first rate intellect and a fair and decent man" who had a "dedication to the rule of law."

But Katyal also bemoaned the circumstances under which he was nominated, calling it "a tragedy of national proportions that Merrick Garland does not sit on the court."

Overall, the first day of testimony underscored that the hearings would remain sharply divided along party lines, with each senator accusing the opposing side of political posturing.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, argued that the Senate owes a president discretion in picking his judicial nominees and pointed out that Gorsuch had received the highest rating possible from the American Bar Association, the "gold standard" in vetting judicial nominees.

Hatch blasted Democrats for wanting Gorsuch to outline how he would vote on certain cases, saying that to them, "judicial independence requires he be beholden to them and [their] political agenda" on issues like abortion.

Other Republicans argued that Gorsuch should be judged on his own merits, legal writings and decisions — not compared to the man who nominated him.

Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., said, "The nominee before us today is not President Trump," nor is he Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell or Judge Garland.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., joked that he was certainly no fan of Trump during the campaign and made the case that Republicans didn't blockade Gorsuch's nomination to allow Trump to make a nomination because most of them didn't believe Trump would win last November.

"If you believe this has been a great plan to get a Trump nominee on the court, then you had to believe Trump was going to win to begin with," said Graham.

The South Carolina Republican pointed out that he had voted to confirm President Obama's two Supreme Court nominees, Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, because they were qualified for the bench and not because he agreed with their politics. Graham urged his Democratic colleagues to give Gorsuch the same deference.

"I'm dying to hear someone over there tell me why [Gorsuch] is not qualified to be sitting here," Graham said.

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz claimed in his comments that Gorsuch's nomination carried with it a "superlegitimacy" because Trump made the Supreme Court vacancy a major campaign issue.

Still, Democrats devoted many of their opening statements to pushing back against the so-called Republican obstructionism that they believe caused Scalia's seat to remain vacant for more than a year.

Copyright 2017 NPR. To see more, visit http://www.npr.org/.