Senate Republicans on Tuesday slammed the door on any formal consideration of a nominee to the Supreme Court by President Obama.

The nominee will not receive a vote, a hearing or even meetings on Capitol Hill, top Republicans declared after returning to Washington for the first time since Justice Antonin Scalia’s unexpected death.

ADVERTISEMENT

“The overwhelming view of the Republican Conference in the Senate is this vacancy should not be filled by this lame-duck president,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell Addison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellMcConnell focuses on confirming judicial nominees with COVID-19 talks stalled McConnell accuses Democrats of sowing division by 'downplaying progress' on election security Warren, Schumer introduce plan for next president to cancel ,000 in student debt MORE (R-Ky.) told reporters.

The extraordinary decision to reject the nominee sight unseen puts both parties in uncharted waters, and ensures that the Supreme Court — and the potential for it to be flipped to a liberal or conservative majority — will be a focal point in the presidential race.

Before Tuesday, there had been doubt as to whether top Senate Republicans would stand behind their initial position that Obama should not be allowed to fill Scalia’s seat.

Some Republicans openly questioned the strategy, warning the party could be tarred as obstructionist in the run-up to the elections.

But Republicans sought to extinguish those questions on Tuesday with a show of unity.

The GOP members of the Senate Judiciary Committee — the panel charged with vetting court nominees — appeared together after a morning meeting to announce that there would not be a confirmation hearing for Obama’s pick.

Sen. Lindsey Graham Lindsey Olin GrahamThe Hill's Campaign Report: Arizona shifts towards Biden | Biden prepares for drive-in town hall | New Biden ad targets Latino voters Senate Democrats' campaign arm announces seven-figure investment to boost Graham challenger Graham: Comey to testify about FBI's Russia probe, Mueller declined invitation MORE (R-S.C.) said members of the panel reached a “consensus” that there should not be hearings or a vote.

McConnell held to that line as reporters peppered him with questions at an afternoon press conference.

“I have many faults, but getting off message is not one of them. This nomination will be determined by whoever wins the presidency in the fall. I agree with the Judiciary Committee’s recommendation that we not have hearings,” he said.

“In short, there will not be action taken.”

McConnell and Sen. Orrin Hatch Orrin Grant HatchBottom line Bottom line Senate GOP divided over whether they'd fill Supreme Court vacancy MORE (R-Utah) added, separately, that they would not meet with Obama’s nominee.

While McConnell said delaying the nominee represents the “overwhelming view of the Republican Conference,” it’s clear that some in his party have misgivings.

The strategy is particularly risky for Senate Republicans facing reelection races this year, many of them in states that tend to favor Democrats.

Sen. Mark Kirk Mark Steven KirkLiberal veterans group urges Biden to name Duckworth VP On the Trail: Senate GOP hopefuls tie themselves to Trump Biden campaign releases video to explain 'what really happened in Ukraine' MORE (Ill.), one of the Senate’s most vulnerable GOP incumbents, has said the Senate should take up Obama’s nominee, calling it his “duty” to consider the choice. He stood by that position on Tuesday.

Similarly, Sen. Susan Collins Susan Margaret CollinsThe Hill's Campaign Report: Biden asks if public can trust vaccine from Trump ahead of Election Day | Oklahoma health officials raised red flags before Trump rally Gideon leads Collins by 12 points in Maine Senate race: poll Senate leaders quash talk of rank-and-file COVID-19 deal MORE (R-Maine), who won reelection in 2014, said Obama’s nominee should at least get a hearing.

“My position remains that if the president sends up a nominee ... I believe that hearings are helpful,” she told reporters, though she declined to say whether she pushed that position during the private conference lunch.

Other Republican incumbents — as well as Sen. Roger Wicker Roger Frederick WickerHillicon Valley: DOJ indicts Chinese, Malaysian hackers accused of targeting over 100 organizations | GOP senators raise concerns over Oracle-TikTok deal | QAnon awareness jumps in new poll Shakespeare Theatre Company goes virtual for 'Will on the Hill...or Won't They?' Republican Senators raise concerns over Oracle-TikTok deal MORE (R-Miss.), who is fighting to retain the majority as chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee — voiced confidence that voters will be on their side.

GOP Sens. Ron Johnson Ronald (Ron) Harold JohnsonSecond GOP senator to quarantine after exposure to coronavirus GOP-led panel to hear from former official who said Burisma was not a factor in US policy The Hill's Morning Report - Sponsored by The Air Line Pilots Association - Trump contradicts CDC director on vaccine, masks MORE (Wis.), John McCain John Sidney McCainThe electoral reality that the media ignores Kelly's lead widens to 10 points in Arizona Senate race: poll COVID response shows a way forward on private gun sale checks MORE (Ariz.) and Pat Toomey (Pa.), who are all up for reelection, on Tuesday said they support keeping the seat vacant until Obama’s successor is sworn in.

“Not acting is acting,” Johnson said.

The president has begun the vetting process to replace Scalia and is said to be a few weeks away from announcing his selection.

All signs point to Obama putting forward a nominee who has been easily confirmed by the Senate in the past. A selection in that mold would play into the hands of Senate Democrats, who are eager to turn the elections into a referendum on the court and what they say is an “obstructionist” Republican majority.

Minority Leader Harry Reid Harry Mason ReidSenate Republicans signal openness to working with Biden Mellman: The likely voter sham Bottom line MORE (D-Nev.) got things rolling on Tuesday, saying that Sen. Chuck Grassley Charles (Chuck) Ernest GrassleySenate Republicans signal openness to working with Biden Senators offer disaster tax relief bill Trump spikes political football with return of Big Ten season MORE (R-Iowa) will “go down in history as the most obstructionist Judiciary chair in the history of this country.”

Grassley is up for reelection this year, though he does not face a serious challenger.

With Republicans holding fast to a blockade of Obama’s nominee, both parties are preparing for a war of words that is likely to rewrite the rulebook for Supreme Court battles.

Seeking ammunition, Republicans have sought to use Vice President Biden’s own words against the White House.

Biden, in a 1992 floor speech in the Senate, argued that if there were to be a Supreme Court vacancy, it should not be filled until after that year’s elections.

GOP lawmakers have dubbed the speech the “Biden rule,” and they cited it repeatedly Tuesday in their comments.

Sen. Dan Coats Daniel (Dan) Ray CoatsFBI chief says Russia is trying to interfere in election to undermine Biden The Hill's Morning Report - Sponsored by The Air Line Pilots Association - Trump, Biden renew push for Latino support Former Intel chief had 'deep suspicions' that Putin 'had something on Trump': book MORE (R-Ind.), who previously suggested that Obama’s nominee should get a hearing, said Tuesday that “many of us have decided to follow the wise council” of Biden and other top Democrats.

The vice president issued a statement Monday evening arguing his comments are being taken out of context, and Democrats have made their own attempts to dig up past statements by Republicans that could aid their cause.

Sen. Richard Burr Richard Mauze BurrRep. Mark Walker says he's been contacted about Liberty University vacancy Overnight Defense: Trump rejects major cut to military health care | Senate report says Trump campaign's Russia contacts posed 'grave' threat Senate report describes closer ties between 2016 Trump campaign, Russia MORE (R-N.C.), who is also up for reelection, said Republicans are “very” unified for the fight to come, adding that taking up a nominee would set a negative precedent.

“Why would we see a precedent where future presidents would look at the last term of their presidency and say, ‘I could stack the court by getting members to retire and I load it up with 40-year-olds,’” he said.

Lydia Wheeler contributed.