Erin Kelly

USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — Top Senate Republicans said Tuesday that they will refuse to even meet with anyone that President Obama nominates to fill the Supreme Court vacancy created by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia.

"I would not be inclined to take one (a meeting with the nominee) myself," Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., told reporters.

Majority Whip John Cornyn, R-Texas, said "I don't see the point of going through the motions" since Senate leaders have no intention of holding a hearing or a vote on any nominee that Obama brings them.

Democrats were outraged.

"It's a sad day when the world's greatest deliberative body won't even deliberate," said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. "Republicans have a right to vote no. But for them to not even give the nominee a hearing...is beyond the pale."

The Senate has been cast into the turmoil of a presidential election season by Scalia's death, with Republicans saying they will not advance anyone Obama nominates and Democrats saying the GOP has been taken over by "extremists."

McConnell accused Obama of using the nomination to wield an "electoral cudgel" and declared that the Senate will not consent to Obama's choice, whomever that may be. The president is still considering possible nominees to replace Scalia, who died on Feb. 13.

"He (Obama) has every right to nominate someone," McConnell said Tuesday. "Even if doing so will inevitably plunge our nation into another bitter and avoidable struggle, that is his right. Even if he never expects that nominee to actually be confirmed but rather to wield as an electoral cudgel, that is his right."

McConnell said the Senate has the constitutional right to provide or withhold consent for the president's nominee.

"In this case, the Senate will withhold it," McConnell said.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, released a copy of a letter Tuesday from all of the panel's Republicans to McConnell saying that they do not intend to hold a hearing on any Obama nominee, let alone a vote.

"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," the letter states.

McConnell told reporters that he agrees that there should be no hearing.

Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the senior Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, said he was surprised by the "political crassness" of that approach.

"This impulsive rush to judgment runs completely contrary to how this body has always treated nominees to the highest court in the land," Leahy said. "Republicans should not allow the hyper-partisan rhetoric of the campaign trail to trump one of the Senate’s most important constitutional duties."

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., called the debate "a pivotal moment for the Republican Party and this Republican Senate."

"The Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt is transforming before our eyes, abandoning its last vestiges of decency and rationality, and unconditionally surrendering its moral compass to Donald Trump and Senator Ted Cruz," Reid said.

Tuesday's debate injected the presidential race into the Senate debate to a much greater degree than on Monday, when senators argued largely over past precedents for filling a Supreme Court vacancy.

Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said that Senate Republican leaders are listening to Trump's advice to "delay, delay, delay" on filling Scalia's empty seat on the court.

In the Feb. 13 Republican debate in South Carolina, Trump said, "I think it’s up to Mitch McConnell and everybody to stop it. It’s called delay, delay, delay."

Durbin said Republicans have the right to vote against Obama's eventual nominee, but argued that they shouldn't "duck" the vote entirely.

"The American people want us to act," Durbin said. "The Senate can't afford to sit on its hands for one year and leave the Supreme Court hanging."

Senate Republicans signal no vote on Supreme Court nominee

McConnell said he wishes Obama would let the next president choose Scalia's replacement.

"He can let the people decide and make this an actual legacy-building moment rather than just another campaign roadshow," McConnell said.

Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said McConnell's charge that Democrats are using the nomination as "an electoral cudgel" would be true only if Democrats were calling for Obama to appoint a well-known, outspoken liberal justice as a direct counterpoint to Scalia. He said he wants a moderate justice with strong legal qualifications, not an ideologue.

"(Scalia) was one of the most conservative justices in American history," Coons said. “I do not think president Obama should seek to replace him with a comparably outspoken progressive nominee. I don’t think this moment calls for that. I think this moment calls for balance and for challenging Republicans to put principle and our Constitution ahead of partisan advantage."

Justice Samuel Alito, speaking at Georgetown University Law Center on Tuesday, said it would be "a new experience" if the court has to continue with just eight justices for a year or more. He added that there is nothing in the Constitution that dictates how many justices there must be.

"We'll deal with it," Alito said.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who serves on the Judiciary Committee, said she believes public pressure might convince Senate Republicans to rethink their refusal to consider Obama's nominee.

"I hope the public gets upset," she said. "Let America see who the president nominates. Let them see and hear the answers to questions (at a hearing)."

Feinstein said public outcry is the Democrats' only real hope to persuade Republicans to change their minds.

"That's the biggest tool of them all," she said. "It works."

Contributing: Paul Singer, Richard Wolf