This notion that if (AAA) game x/y/z game isn't planned, then that must mean Switch isn't powerful enough to run it, is a very poorly conceived and monotonous thought. Not everything is based on power. Architectural differences/similarities come into play, development time & budget, and perhaps most importantly, potential sales in respect to installed base.
Capcom is well aware that they do have a Resident Evil fan base on Nintendo consoles(Kudos to them for laying that foundation back on GameCube), but they've have always waited until the systems have gotten off to a decent start before dropping a title. However, as it stands currently, that RE fanbase is on Switch zero! That's not much data to work with, nor does it boosts confidence when you consider Switch is coming off the back of Nintendo's worst performing console to date. Even Wii - popular as it was - saw its first RE game a year after launch. 3DS - which Capcom were betting on big time - saw its first RE game several months after launch.
People are reading the worst into these statements, but historically, this is business as usual. Capcom has never been there at or near Nintendo system launches with RE, even when they've been in development before the systems launched (Revelations, Umbrella Chronicles), so I wouldn't read too much into this. I'm fairly confident that we will see Resident Evil - in some form - for Switch somewhere down the line, especially if sales are decent. I'm also willing to bet that it will be a gorgeous looking game on the Switch too, even when stacked against RE games on current consoles.