The political gridlock to nominate Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's successor is becoming much more difficult with President Barack Obama and Senate Republicans disagreeing on the nomination process.

President Obama's "Spoiler-Free" Insights

On Wednesday morning, SCOTUSblog published a post written by Obama, where he defended his presidential right to nominate a candidate to serve on the Supreme Court.

"It's a duty that I take seriously, and one that I will fulfill in the weeks ahead. It's also one of the most important decisions that a President will make," Obama wrote. "Rulings handed down by the Supreme Court directly affect our economy, our security, our rights, and our daily lives."

Obama reiterated that he's taking the nomination process seriously and plans to take considerable amount of time, debate, consultation and reflection with experts and individuals from both major political parties.

Obama listed some "spoiler-free insights" regarding what he's considering for a Supreme Court justice. First, Obama said the individual must be a qualified and intellectual candidate with an independent mind, excellent credentials and integrity. Second, the president plans to appoint someone who understands the role; that the individual should only interpret the law and not create laws.

"I seek judges who approach decisions without any particular ideology or agenda, but rather a commitment to impartial justice, a respect for precedent, and a determination to faithfully apply the law to the facts at hand."

Finally, he wants a nominee that understands justice affects the lives of every American, especially in a rapidly changing democratic society.

Obama added that senators have a constitutional responsibility to consider the person he appoints and hopes the lawmakers move quickly to debate and confirm the nominee.

GOP Reaffirm Freeze on SCOTUS Nomination Process

On Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., acknowledged that Obama has the right to nominate someone but the Senate also has a constitutional right to provide or withhold consent.

McConnell also tweeted statements from Democratic Party leaders, including Vice President Joe Biden from his time as senator for Delaware, to further defend the GOP's stance to not debate or confirm a nominee during the current election year.

Whoever Obama nominates has to go through the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, currently led by Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa. In a letter sent to McConnell on Tuesday, Grassley and fellow Judiciary Committee Republicans announced they will use their "constitutional authority to withhold consent of a Supreme Court nomination and will not hold hearings on a Supreme Court nominee until the next President is sworn in."

"We intend to exercise the constitutional power granted the Senate under Article II, Section 2 to ensure the American people are not deprived of the opportunity to engage in a full and robust debate over the type of jurist they wish to decide some of the most critical issues of our time," wrote Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans, which includes GOP presidential candidate Ted Cruz, later adding, "Because our decision is based on constitutional principle and born of a necessity to protect the will of the American people, this Committee will not hold hearings on any Supreme Court nominee until after our next President is sworn in on January 20, 2017."

Obama Defends Nomination Right & Rumored Hispanic Nominee

Following a bilateral meeting with Jordanian King Abdullah II on late Wednesday morning, Obama responded to Senate Republicans' plans to not hold a hearing regarding his Supreme Court nominee. Obama said he will do his job, per the Constitution, to provide a nominee. The president added that he hopes the Senate Judiciary Committee fulfill their job to grant a hearing and give courtesy of meeting with the nominee.

"I understand the posture that they're taking right now. I get the politics of it," said Obama. "I'm sure they're under enormous pressure from their base and their constituencies around this issue. I've talked to many of them, and I've told them I'm sympathetic. And, by the way, there's not a lot of vigor when they defend the position that they're taking, that they wouldn't even meet, for example, with a Supreme Court nominee. They're pretty sheepish about it when they make those comments. So we'll see how this plays itself out. But I'm going to do my job."

He added, "I'm going to nominate somebody and let the American people decide as to whether that person is qualified. And if they are qualified, let the American people decide whether there's enough time for the U.S. Senate to hold hearings and have a vote. It's not as if, from what I see, the Senate calendar is so full that we don't have time to get this done."

By early Wednesday afternoon, reports circulated that Republican Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval is being considered, by the White House, to succeed Scalia. According to The Washington Post, several sources said Sandoval, referred to as a "moderate pro-choice Hispanic Republican," was being vetted, but the White House did not confirm if he's on the president's radar.

Sandoval may have support from a leading Senate Democrat: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.

During an interview on CNN, Reid said he would support the Nevada governor, if picked as the next Supreme Court justice.

"I don't pick the justices, but I know if he were picked, I would support the man," said Reid. "He's a good person, has a great record, and has been a tremendously good governor in spite of having to deal with some very big problems there."

__

For the latest updates, follow Latin Post's Michael Oleaga on Twitter: @EditorMikeO or contact via email: m.oleaga@latinpost.com.

Related