Breaking News Emails Get breaking news alerts and special reports. The news and stories that matter, delivered weekday mornings. 
 
 / Updated By Erik Ortiz, Corky Siemaszko and Phil Helsel 
 
 In the aftermath of the Oklahoma City bombing, Merrick Garland said goodbye to his wife and young daughters and flew out to the scene of the worst act of domestic terrorism on U.S. soil. 
 
 As a supervisor with the Justice Department in 1995, Garland's job was to help put away accused bombers Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols. The voluminous investigation required that each scrap of evidence be correctly cataloged — and ensured that those behind the brutal deaths of 168 people, including young children, would be brought to justice. 
 
 "Perhaps most important is the way he did it," President Barack Obama said Wednesday in recounting Garland's efforts. Obama stood with Garland at the White House as he announced the veteran federal appeals judge as his pick to replace Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court. 
 
 "When people offered to turn over evidence voluntarily, he refused," Obama continued, "taking the harder route of obtaining the proper subpoenas instead — because Merrick would take no chances that someone who murdered innocent Americans might go free on a technicality." 
 
 But the president said it was a simple gesture of Garland's that also showed a human side. 
 
 "Everywhere he went, he carried with him in his briefcase the program from the memorial service with each of the victims’ names inside — a constant searing reminder of why he had to succeed," Obama said. 
 
 Related: GOP Leaders Double Down on Pledge to Block SCOTUS Pick 
 
 Garland's by-the-book application of the law has been lauded in other high-profile cases he has helped to supervise, including the case against "Unabomber" Ted Kaczynski in 1996. 
 
 Garland's robust credentials had often landed him on observers' lists of potential Supreme Court nominees. He was reportedly considered a top pick for the court in 2010 after Justice John Paul Stevens announced he would retire, although then-Solicitor General Elena Kagan was ultimately chosen. 
 
 But this year won't be an easy road to the nation's highest court. GOP senators have vowed to block whomever Obama nominates. 
 
 The president's selection of Garland could sway some Republicans drawn to his center-left views in a court that, with's Scalia death last month, lost one of its most vocal conservatives. 
 
 In 1997, Republican U.S. senator and Judiciary Committee member Orrin Hatch championed Garland's appointment to the federal appeals court, saying "his intelligence and his scholarship cannot be questioned." 
 
 Related: Obama Nominates Federal Judge Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court 
 
 Born in Chicago, Garland graduated in 1970 from Niles West High School in Skokie, Illinois. 
 
 "This is fantastic," Niles West Principal Jason Ness said when informed by NBC News that Garland was Obama’s Supreme Court pick. "He’s a great role model. We’re all very proud." 
 
 Merrick Garland at the Niles West High School. Courtesy of Niles West High School 
 
 Ness said Garland was "very involved in high school." 
 
 Among other things, Garland was president of both the National Honor Society and Student Council, belonged to the debate team, the forensics team and the German Club. He also performed in high school musicals like "Guys and Dolls" and "Pygmalion." 
 
 "There were not enough hours in the day for him to do everything he did while in high school," Ness said. 
 
 Centrist record 
 
 In terms of his views, Garland would not be among the court’s most liberal justices, SCOTUSblog publisher Tom Goldstein wrote in a recent post. When his name came up in 2010, some liberal activists opposed the potential pick, calling Garland a centrist and citing his ruling in a case involving Guantanamo detainees, The Washington Post reported at the time. 
 
 In 2003, Garland agreed with conservative judges against Kuwaiti detainees at the military prison who tried to challenge their confinement by citing a lack of evidence, the newspaper said. 
 
 Garland, when he was first nominated to the appeals court, said a judge's responsibility isn't to legislate in response to a question about judicial activism. He said federal judges "do not have roving commissions to solve societal problems," according to SCOTUSblog. 
 
 Garland is a graduate of Harvard Law School and clerked for Supreme Court Justice William J. Brennan before gigs at the Justice Department as deputy assistant attorney general for the criminal division and principal associate deputy attorney general. 
 
 His background made him popular even with Republicans when he was first nominated to the D.C. Circuit by President Bill Clinton in 1995, but the full Senate didn't initially act on his nomination. 
 
 The issue wasn't Garland, Iowa Republican Sen. Charles Grassley said at the time, but whether the court needed another judge at all. Grassley is now the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, which would oversee any hearings on a nominee. 
 
 Related: Poll Finds Majority Disapproves of GOP Plan to Block Nominee 
 
 Garland won appointment to the federal appeals court in D.C. in 1997 by a Senate vote of 76-23 — although again, any opposition to his nomination wasn't about his qualifications. 
 
 At the time, Hatch, who still sits on the Judiciary Committee, cited his work as a federal prosecutor and judicial credentials. 
 
 "I believe he is not only a fine nominee, but is as good as Republicans can expect from this (the Clinton) administration. In fact, I would place him at the top of the list," Hatch said at the time, according to Congressional records. 
 
 Seven Republicans who voted for Garland are still in the Senate. In 2013, he was was appointed the D.C. Circuit's chief justice. 
 
 As a judge, Garland said Wednesday, "fidelity to the law" has always been a cornerstone to how he rules. 
 
 "People must be confident that a judge's decisions are determined by the law and only the law. For a judge to be worthy of such trust, he or she must be faithful to the Constitution and to the statutes passed by the Congress," he added. "He or she must put aside his personal views or preferences and follow the law — not make it." 
 
 If confirmed, Garland would also be the fourth Jewish justice currently on the Supreme Court. The other five members are Catholic. 
 
 Related: Potential Supreme Court Picks Have History of Partisan Donations 
 
 Speaking from the White House, Garland said his Jewish immigrant grandparents fled anti-Semitism in Russia to "make a better life for their children in America." 
 
 The son of an advertising executive father and PTA-involved mother, Garland said service to the community is a "responsibility above all others." 
 
 "There could be no higher public service," he said, "than serving as a member of the United States Supreme Court." ||||| Justice Who Is Merrick Garland? CREDIT: AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama stop to look at a portrait of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia after paying their respects at Scalia's casket in the Great Hall of the Supreme Court in Washington, Friday, Feb. 19, 2016. 
 
 Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT), the longest serving Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, offered his own thoughts on who President Obama should nominate to fill the seat left open by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia last week. “[Obama] could easily name Merrick Garland, who is a fine man,” Hatch told the conservative news site Newsmax, before adding that “he probably won’t do that because this appointment is about the election. So I’m pretty sure he’ll name someone the [liberal Democratic base] wants.” 
 
 On Wednesday, the president reportedly plans to call Hatch’s bluff. Multiple sources report that the president will announce his nomination of Garland, the chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, to fill Scalia’s seat. 
 
 Chief Judge Merrick Garland 
 
 Garland is unquestionably qualified to sit on the Supreme Court. A 19 year veteran of the DC Circuit — a court that is widely viewed as the second-most powerful in the nation — Garland graduated with high honors from Harvard Law School. He clerked for Justice William Brennan, and spent a few years as a partner in the multinational law firm Arnold and Porter. He also held senior positions in the Justice Department, including a leadership role in the department’s criminal division and a stint as Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General. 
 
 At age 63, Garland is also the oldest person nominated to the Supreme Court since President Nixon named Justice Lewis Powell in 1971. Thus, if confirmed, Garland is unlikely to match — or even approach — Justice Scalia’s nearly 30 years on the Supreme Court. 
 
 Garland's relatively advanced age may help explain why Hatch floated the DC Circuit chief judge as his ideal Obama nominee. Another factor that almost certainly played a role is Garland's reputation for moderation. In 2003, for example, Garland joined an opinion holding that the federal judiciary lacks the authority “to assert habeas corpus jurisdiction at the behest of an alien held at a military base leased from another nation, a military base outside the sovereignty of the United States" -- an opinion that effectively prohibited Guantanamo Bay detainees from seeking relief in civilian courts. A little over a year later, the Supreme Court reversed this decision in Rasul v. Bush. Although, in fairness, it should be noted that legal experts disagree about whether the decision Garland joined was mandated by existing precedents. 
 
 The former prosecutor also has a relatively conservative record on criminal justice. A 2010 examination of his decisions by SCOTUSBlog's Tom Goldstein determined that “Judge Garland rarely votes in favor of criminal defendants’ appeals of their convictions.” Goldstein “identified only eight such published rulings,” in addition to seven where “he voted to reverse the defendant’s sentence in whole or in part, or to permit the defendant to raise a argument relating to sentencing on remand,” during the 13 years Garland had then spent on the DC Circuit. 
 
 To be clear, Garland's record does not suggest that he would join the Court's right flank if confirmed to the Supreme Court. He would likely vote much more often than not with the Supreme Court's liberals, while occasionally casting a heterodox vote. Nevertheless, as Goldstein wrote in 2010 when Garland was under consideration to replace the retiring liberal Justice John Paul Stevens, "to the extent that the President's goal is to select a nominee who will articulate a broad progressive vision for the law, Judge Garland would be a very unlikely candidate to take up that role." 
 
 The Garland nomination, in other words, appears to be an attempt to box in Senate Republicans who've refused to confirm anyone Obama nominates. There are strong reasons to doubt whether this strategy will work, however. Sen. Hatch, who undoubtedly regrets his decision to praise Garland shortly before this nomination, has outright refused to meet with anyone Obama nominates to replace Scalia. And he's far from alone within the GOP caucus. ||||| President Barack Obama has nominated Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court. Garland, a judicial moderate, currently serves as chief judge of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. 
 
 The announcement comes about a month after Justice Antonin Scalia’s sudden death put the Supreme Court’s ideological balance up for grabs, and Garland’s nomination is certain to make him a new focal point in the intense partisan fight for control of the court. 
 
 Early Career 
 
 Garland was born in Chicago and grew up in the suburbs of the Windy City. He received his undergraduate education from Harvard College, and later earned his law degree there in 1977. He then clerked for Judge Henry Friendly of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals and Supreme Court Justice William Brennan, both appointed by President Dwight D. Eisenhower. 
 
 Resume 
 
 Garland was formerly a partner at law firm Arnold & Porter, but the majority of his career has been spent in government. He’s held roles as special assistant to the U.S. attorney general, assistant U.S. attorney for D.C. and deputy assistant attorney general. 
 
 Later, as principal associate deputy attorney general, Garland oversaw the prosecution of the Oklahoma City bombing and of Theodore Kaczynski, better known as the "Unabomber." President Bill Clinton nominated Garland to the D.C. Circuit, where he’s served since 1997. He became chief judge in 2013. 
 
 Chances of Being Confirmed 
 
 In recent weeks, Senate Republican leaders have vowed not to hold hearings on Obama's nominee, arguing that the decision ought to be made by the next president. But Garland’s reputation as a fair-minded, judicial moderate may undercut efforts by GOP opponents to obstruct his nomination. His law enforcement background, including his pursuit of the death penalty in high-profile prosecutions, may further insulate him from Republican attacks. 
 
 On the other hand, his Supreme Court clerkship under the liberal Justice Brennan, and his appointment to the D.C. Circuit by President Clinton, may supply ammunition to Senate Republicans. 
 
 Personal Life 
 
 Garland and wife Lynn were married in 1987 and have two daughters. His hobbies include tennis and skiing, according to The New York Times. 
 
 Interesting Facts 
 
 At age 63, Garland would be one of the oldest associate justices ever appointed to the Supreme Court, which may make his nomination somewhat surprising since presidents tend to pick younger justices who can serve longer terms. Garland was reportedly considered for the vacancies ultimately filled by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. 
 
 Get real-time updates as this story unfolds. To start, just "star" this story in ABC News' phone app. Download ABC News for iPhone here or ABC News for Android here. ||||| FILE - In this March 14, 2016, file photo, President Barack Obama speaks at the Chief of Missions Conference at the State Department in Washington. Obama said Wednesday, March 16, he will reveal his Supreme... (Associated Press) 
 
 WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama will nominate federal appeals court judge Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court, congressional sources said Wednesday. The pick sets up a confrontation with Republicans who say they will refuse to consider his nomination in an election year. 
 
 Garland is the chief judge for the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, a court whose influence over federal policy and national security matters has made it a proving ground for potential Supreme Court justices. 
 
 He would replace conservative, Justice Antonin Scalia, who died unexpectedly last month, leaving behind a bitter election-year fight over the future of the court. 
 
 Congressional sources spoke on condition of anonymity because Obama had not yet announced his choice. 
 
 Garland was confirmed to the D.C. Circuit in 1997 with backing from a majority in both parties, including seven current Republicans senators. 
 
 Obama planned to introduce his pick at 11 a.m. in the White House Rose Garden. ||||| Joshua Roberts/Reuters 
 
 In the event you weren’t quite convinced that the White House could turn the governance of America into the world’s most elaborate game of Clue, some Republicans are now floating the name of Merrick Garland to replace ousted FBI Director James Comey. 
 
 That’s right, Merrick Garland, the chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. 
 
 Dahlia Lithwick Dahlia Lithwick writes about the courts and the law for Slate and hosts the podcast Amicus. 
 
 
 
 Advertisement 
 
 
 
 Merrick Garland, the jurist who couldn’t get a hearing, or even a cup of cold coffee, from the Republican-controlled Senate after President Obama nominated him to the Supreme Court. 
 
 Merrick the Invisible Boy Garland. 
 
 Unless there is some other Merrick Garland who Ted Cruz has been hiding in a closet somewhere, this is the very same guy who was, as Orrin Hatch once put it, “a fine man,” a “consensus nominee,” and a “moderate” until he became, upon being nominated by Obama, part “of a voting bloc on the court that consistently upholds abortion on demand” and “the most anti-gun nominee in recent history.” So when Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah decides that poor Garland would be the perfect pick to be the next FBI director, one might reasonably wonder which Garland he’s talking about. Does this mean Garland is a “fine man” again? Or is this just the latest humiliation to be visited upon the man Republicans have spent the last year smacking around like a cat toy? 
 
 This all started on Tuesday, when University of Chicago law professor Geoffrey Stone puckishly suggested that Garland should be tapped as the new FBI director. Then, on Wednesday night, the idea was floated seriously, one supposes, by the Daily Caller, which recommended Garland on account of his “national reputation for thorough, vigorous prosecutions. He led the trial team that brought a successful death penalty case against Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh, and directed the prosecution of unabomber Ted Kaczynski from Washington. His ascent in the department was meteoric, and the legacy he left won bipartisan acclaim.” 
 
 Advertisement 
 
 
 
 Great Scott! This man sounds amazing. Why hasn’t the nation heard tell of him yet? 
 
 The Daily Caller was quick to note that Garland’s move to the FBI would also clear a seat on the critically important D.C. Circuit, thus allowing Trump to appoint a conservative to a court on which at this moment there are seven Democratic appointees and four Republican ones. Deploying the same impeccable logic that allowed the White House to convince itself that Democrats would celebrate the firing of Comey because they like Hillary Clinton more than the rule of law, the Caller argued that Democrats would be insane hypocrites to oppose the choice of Garland for the FBI gig: “Senate Democrats joined the previous administration in offering uniformly glowing assessments of Garland’s quality and experience. None could now plausibly marshal a convincing case against him, after mounting a year-long campaign to secure him a spot on the nation’s highest tribunal.” 
 
 Get Slate in your inbox. 
 
 Lee then made his support for Garland public on Thursday morning, explaining in a TV interview, “I would imagine that this might be a post that might interest [Garland], and it might be a post that he could serve in very effectively.” A Lee staffer told the Hill this suggestion was not meant to be hilarious, saying, “He’s eminently qualified and has the reputation needed to restore public confidence in [the] FBI.” A Fox Business News reporter then appeared to suggest that Vice President Mike Pence and White House Counsel Don McGahn are on board, too. It’s an idea everyone can get behind! Maybe Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan want the gig, too! They can all be FBI directors! 
 
 Never mind that last October, when explaining why he would not grant Garland so much as a hearing for the vacancy at the high court, Lee said Garland could not be independent enough to be trusted because “the last Democratic nominee to the Supreme Court … who voted independently was Byron White.” Lee cautioned that “Democrats vote in lock step. … That is how it works. I don’t think Merrick Garland would be any different.” 
 
 Advertisement 
 
 
 
 So, Garland is independent enough to head the FBI but not independent enough to be on the high court. Or, wait. Maybe he wasn’t independent enough back in October but he’s independent enough now. Your guess is as good as mine. 
 
 Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar, for some reason, is buying what Lee is selling. 
 
 Good idea @SenMikeLee. Former prosecutor Merrick Garland for FBI Director is great idea. Need special prosecutor toohttps://t.co/HjMdwIGxAq — Amy Klobuchar (@amyklobuchar) May 11, 2017 
 
 Putting aside this inexplicable Survivor-level reality show alliance with the enemy team, this Garland gambit seems to be an 11th-hour effort by Lee to add his name to the mix of young Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee who are grievously concerned about Trump’s actions and also running for the White House in 2020. (If there is still an America.) 
 
 Lee was a never Trumper back in the fall. And he’s doubtless a bit sad that Ben Sasse and Jeff Flake managed to get out ahead of him on looking grievously concerned about the Comey ouster this week. There is no cost to Lee in suggesting Garland for this job. It amounts, as Elizabeth Wydra of the Constitutional Accountability Center notes in an email, to little more than a headline that reads “Mike Lee wants to replace Merrick Garland with a conservative on the D.C. Circuit.” ||||| WASHINGTON — President Obama on Wednesday nominated Merrick B. Garland to be the nation’s 113th Supreme Court justice, choosing a centrist appellate judge who could reshape the court for a generation and become the face of a bitter election-year confirmation struggle. 
 
 In selecting Judge Garland, 63, a well-known figure in Washington legal circles who has drawn praise from members of both parties, Mr. Obama dared Republican senators to ignore public pressure and make good on their promise to block consideration of any nominee until after the next president is chosen. 
 
 The nomination to fill the seat on the court created by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia sets in motion a standoff that is likely to play out for many months, perhaps without resolution. Its outcome could tip the ideological balance of the nation’s highest court, and an array of well-financed interest groups on both sides has already assembled for the battle over the nomination. ||||| President Obama is expected to nominate Merrick Garland to serve on the Supreme Court. Here is what you need to know about Garland. (Claritza Jimenez,Gillian Brockell/The Washington Post) 
 
 President Obama is expected to nominate Merrick Garland to serve on the Supreme Court. Here is what you need to know about Garland. (Claritza Jimenez,Gillian Brockell/The Washington Post) 
 
 To some, Merrick Garland’s experience and demeanor could make him the quintessential Supreme Court candidate for a Democratic president. 
 
 A magna cum laude Harvard Law School graduate, he clerked not just for any Supreme Court justice but for William J. Brennan Jr., the legendary liberal champion. He was a partner at a prominent Washington law firm, then ascended the ranks at the Justice Department, where he oversaw two of the biggest domestic terrorism cases in U.S. history. 
 
 Now, the well-regarded chief judge of the D.C. federal appeals court is under serious consideration to be President Obama’s nominee for the nation’s highest court, according to people familiar with the deliberations. “Merrick is in his own league . . . He’s pretty unassailable from a reputational standpoint,” said a person close to the selection process who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations. 
 
 But Garland could face a number of political factors that would put him out of contention, according to legal experts and others who have spoken with administration officials. Garland’s two-decade track record as a judge may wind up working against him, these people said, because if Republicans pore over his career, they may find more to use against him in a fierce confirmation battle. By contrast, many of the others being considered by the White House are younger and have had shorter careers. 
 
 [Activists push Obama to nominate black woman to the Supreme Court] 
 
 In addition, Garland is a white male at a moment when Democrats may want a nominee around whom they can rally minorities in the party’s base, particularly during a presidential election year. Civil rights groups, for example, are pressing the nation’s first African American president to nominate the first black woman to the court. 
 
 Barbara R. Arnwine, president of the Transformative Justice Coalition and a longtime civil rights activist, said that while Garland brings “incredible qualifications and an impressive background and résumé,” she believes a number of female black judges are just as qualified. Nominating Garland, she said, “would send a message that the status quo of American privilege is still in place.” 
 
 Given that Republicans in the Senate have vowed to block any nominee, the president’s pick could be more important for its political symbolism. 
 
 “You know the person isn’t getting confirmed,” said one legal expert who closely follows the Supreme Court and spoke on the condition of anonymity out of respect for Garland, whose nomination he considers unlikely. “Why would you disappoint every significant constituency when you’re trying to motivate people?” 
 
 [What would a Hindu justice mean for the Supreme Court?] 
 
 Garland was also a finalist for the first two Supreme Court vacancies Obama filled, according to sources who were close to those processes. But even if he is not chosen this time, people who know him say he feels honored just to be considered. 
 
 “He is very content to be the chief judge of the D.C. Circuit. It’s a wonderful job, and he’s wonderfully suited to it,” said Jamie Gorelick, a former deputy attorney general who worked with Garland at the Justice Department in the Clinton administration and considers her former colleague “supremely qualified” for the high court. “Getting an appointment to the Supreme Court requires lightning to strike.” 
 
 Gorelick praised Garland’s role at the Justice Department in supervising the massive investigations that led to the prosecutions of the bombers of the federal building in Oklahoma City and the Unabomber. 
 
 “We had a lot of very seasoned prosecutors, but when you have a matter that is both substantively difficult and cuts across the department, a really talented person such as Merrick will lead those,” said Gorelick, who added that Garland is a “brilliant lawyer and judge” who is known to be highly collegial even with colleagues across the ideological spectrum. 
 
 Garland was nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit by President Bill Clinton in 1997 and confirmed on a 76-to-32 vote. He won support from 32 Republicans. 
 
 In 2010, when Garland was under consideration for the Supreme Court vacancy that went to Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) told Reuters that he had known Garland for years and that he would be “a consensus nominee.” 
 
 Hatch, a powerful voice on judicial selection, said then that there was “no question” Garland could be confirmed. 
 
 Garland is among at least six candidates known to be under consideration. The others are judges Sri Srinivasan and Patricia A. Millett, more recent appointees to the D.C. appeals court that Garland heads; Jane L. Kelly, an appeals court judge based in Iowa; Paul J. Watford, an appeals court judge in California; and Ketanji Brown Jackson, a U.S. district judge in Washington. At 63, Garland is by far the oldest candidate for the lifetime Supreme Court appointment. 
 
 “He’s extremely well qualified, and he’s a superb judge,” said Michael Greenberger, a University of Maryland law professor who was a senior Justice Department official in the Clinton administration. “He’s widely revered on both sides of the aisle. If the White House is looking to get somebody through . . . he would be a great candidate.” ||||| President Obama nominated Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court on Wednesday, launching an election-year fight with Republicans that will reverberate in battleground states across the country. 
 
 Senate Republicans immediately ruled out any action on Garland, the chief judge of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, who has nearly 20 years of experience on the bench and a reputation as a moderate. 
 
 ADVERTISEMENT 
 
 Obama chose Garland, one of three finalists for the job, to make it tougher for Republicans to stick to their position that no nominee from the president will receive hearings or votes in the 236 days before Americans elect a new president. 
 
 Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell Mitch McConnellThis week: GOP picks up the pieces after healthcare defeat The Memo: Winners and losers from the battle over healthcare GOP senators pitch alternatives after House pulls ObamaCare repeal bill MORE (R-Ky.), who within hours of Justice Antonin Scalia’s death said there would be no vote this year on his replacement, said the naming of Obama’s nominee made no difference. 
 
 “The American people may well elect a president who decides to nominate Judge Garland for Senate consideration,” McConnell said from the Senate floor. “The next president may also nominate somebody very different. Either way, our view is this: Give the people a voice in filling this vacancy.” 
 
 Obama’s nomination of Garland appeared to unify Democrats, who rallied around their already well-worn argument that Republicans should do their job and consider the nomination. 
 
 It’s an argument that will be on a continuous loop as the party seeks to use the court fight against vulnerable Republicans. Democrats need to net at least four seats and the White House to take back the Senate majority — a threshold they see as well within their reach. 
 
 “The Senate should do its constitutional duty and provide this good man with a fair and open confirmation process. The American people expect nothing less,” Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid Harry ReidThis obscure Senate rule could let VP Mike Pence fully repeal ObamaCare once and for all Sharron Angle to challenge GOP rep in Nevada Fox's Watters asks Trump whom he would fire: Baldwin, Schumer or Zucker MORE (Nev.) said in a statement. 
 
 Senate Republicans weren’t quite as unified as Democrats on Wednesday, as seven GOP senators said they were willing to consider a meeting with Garland. 
 
 Those senators include Mark Kirk Mark KirkObamaCare repeal bill would defund Planned Parenthood Leaked ObamaCare bill would defund Planned Parenthood GOP senator won't vote to defund Planned Parenthood MORE (Ill.), Rob Portman Rob PortmanOvernight Finance: Senators spar over Wall Street at SEC pick's hearing | New CBO score for ObamaCare bill | Agency signs off on Trump DC hotel lease GOP senators offer bill to require spending cuts with debt-limit hikes Vulnerable Senate Dem: Border tax concerning for agriculture MORE (Ohio) and Kelly Ayotte Kelly AyotteFEC commissioner to Trump: Prove voter fraud Live coverage: Day three of Supreme Court nominee hearing Lewandowski saw no evidence of voter fraud in New Hampshire MORE (N.H.), who are each facing tough reelection races. 
 
 “The Senate’s constitutionally defined role to provide advice and consent is as important as the president’s role in proposing a nominee, and I will assess Judge Merrick Garland based on his record and qualifications,” Kirk said in a statement. 
 
 Portman and Ayotte said their meetings were a courtesy and that they backed McConnell’s move to withhold hearings for an Obama nominee. 
 
 “I’m not going to change my position, but I meet with people all the time,” Portman told The Hill. “It would be a meeting in which I explain my position and why I feel the way that I do.” 
 
 “He may view it as a waste of time,” he added of Garland. 
 
 McConnell told Garland directly in a phone call that he will not meet with him and that the nominee should not expect a hearing. 
 
 “The leader reiterated his position that the American people will have a voice in this vacancy and that the Senate will appropriately revisit the matter when it considers the qualifications of the person the next president nominates,” said Don Stewart, McConnell’s spokesman. 
 
 Garland will meet Thursday with Reid and Sen. Patrick Leahy Patrick LeahyDems get it wrong: 'Originalism' is mainstream, even for liberal judges Live coverage: Day three of Supreme Court nominee hearing Dems land few punches on Gorsuch MORE (D-Vt.), the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He will meet after the Senate’s recess with the panel’s chairman, Sen. Chuck Grassley Chuck GrassleyThis week: GOP picks up the pieces after healthcare defeat GOP senators pitch alternatives after House pulls ObamaCare repeal bill Friends, foes spar in fight on Trump’s Supreme Court nominee MORE (R-Iowa). 
 
 Grassley, whom Democrats have targeted over his stance on a Supreme Court nominee, said he spoke with Garland to offer his congratulations. At the meeting, he said he would explain to Garland why a vote on confirming a new justice should wait until after the election. 
 
 “A lifetime appointment that could dramatically impact individual freedoms and change the direction of the court for at least a generation is too important to get bogged down in politics. The American people shouldn’t be denied a voice,” Grassley said in an earlier statement. 
 
 Republicans said Democrats shouldn’t hold their breath if they expect ­McConnell to back down. 
 
 “I don’t see the majority leader changing his mind on this issue,” said Sen. Susan Collins Susan CollinsThis week: GOP picks up the pieces after healthcare defeat GOP senators pitch alternatives after House pulls ObamaCare repeal bill Five takeaways from Labor pick’s confirmation hearing MORE, a Maine centrist who said she would meet with Garland and opposes the decision to not hold hearings. 
 
 “He believes strongly that this should be a decision made by the next president,” she said. “I don’t agree with that decision but I respect it.” 
 
 Obama is coordinating strategy on the court fight closely with Senate Democrats. 
 
 He told Democratic members of the Judiciary Committee about his pick in a conference call before he announced it publicly. 
 
 The president also consulted with both Democrats and Republicans on the panel before selecting Garland. 
 
 Some Republicans are wavering over whether to invite Garland to their offices. They know Democrats will try to leverage the meetings into hearings, yet they don’t want to appear obstructionist or simply rude. 
 
 Sen. Orrin Hatch Orrin HatchOvernight Finance: US preps cases linking North Korea to Fed heist | GOP chair says Dodd-Frank a 2017 priority | Chamber pushes lawmakers on Trump's trade pick | Labor nominee faces Senate US Chamber urges quick vote on USTR nominee Lighthizer Live coverage: Day three of Supreme Court nominee hearing MORE (R-Utah), a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, said he had not yet decided on whether to meet with Garland, as did Sen. Ron Johnson Ron JohnsonLawmakers share photos of their dogs in honor of National Puppy Day GOP targets Baldwin over Wisconsin VA scandal The Hill's Whip List: 36 GOP no votes on ObamaCare repeal plan MORE (R-Wis.), who faces a tough reelection fight in November. 
 
 Obama tried to pressure Hatch directly by quoting his statement in support of Garland in 1997. 
 
 “Back then he said, ‘In all honesty, I would like to see one person come to this floor and say one reason why Merrick Garland does not deserve this position,’ ” Obama said in a Rose Garden ceremony with Garland. 
 
 Hatch later in the day floated the idea of holding confirmation hearings and a vote in the lame-duck session between the election and the start of the new Congress. 
 
 “It’s the toxicity of this environment. I’m tired of the Supreme Court being politicized. I think we’ve diminished the court over the years. The only way to get out of that is to get out of this toxic environment and have the matter decided then,” Hatch said. 
 
 If Republicans won the presidency, however, they almost would certainly not move Garland in the December wrap-up session. 
 
 Along with Hatch, Republican Sens. Dan Coats Dan CoatsMcCain says he hasn't met with Trump since inauguration Oversight committee asks White House, FBI for Flynn records Live coverage: FBI director testifies to Congress MORE (Ind.), Thad Cochran Thad CochranOvernight Defense: FBI chief confirms Trump campaign, Russia probe | Senators push for Afghan visas | Problems persist at veterans' suicide hotline Senators ask to include visas for Afghans in spending bill Shutdown politics return to the Senate MORE (Miss.), Collins, James Inhofe James InhofeRepeal of Obama drilling rule stalls in the Senate GOP senator: EPA 'brainwashing our kids' A guide to the committees: Senate MORE (Okla.), John McCain John McCainRepublicans giving Univision the cold shoulder: report This week: GOP picks up the pieces after healthcare defeat Democrats step up calls that Russian hack was act of war MORE (Ariz.) and Pat Roberts Pat RobertsDems mock House GOP over lack of women in healthcare meeting Perdue vows to be chief salesman for US agriculture abroad GOP senator apologizes for mammogram joke MORE (Kan.) voted for Garland nearly 10 years ago. 
 
 Outside groups at both ends of the political spectrum are preparing massive public relations blitzes over the next several weeks. 
 
 The Judicial Crisis Network, a conservative group, announced in a conference call Wednesday the launch of a $2 million advertising campaign opposing Garland. It will focus on Democrats in conservative-leaning or swing states and press them on Garland’s controversial decisions on gun control and environmental regulation. 
 
 Liberal groups, meanwhile, are hammering vulnerable Republicans for blocking him. Polls show independents in several battleground states say the court vacancy should be filled this year. 
 
 Lindsay Jakows, the New Hampshire campaign organizer for People for the American Way, said, “Garland deserves a fair consideration, and Sen. Ayotte should call on her party leadership to make sure that’s what he receives.” 
 
 Democratic political action committee End Citizens United, which takes its name in reference to the landmark Supreme Court ruling that loosened campaign finance regulations, plans to run ads targeting Grassley, Ayotte and Sen. Roy Blunt Roy BluntTop Dems prep for future while out of the spotlight Overnight Healthcare: Pressure mounts for changes to GOP ObamaCare bill Pressure mounts for changes to ObamaCare bill MORE (R-Mo.), a member of the GOP leadership who is up for reelection. 
 
 The selection of Garland struck outside liberal groups largely by surprise. Although he’s not as liberal as some of them might prefer under different circumstances, they’re unified behind the effort to pressure Republicans to hold hearings and a vote. 
 
 AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said he had initially heard Obama would tap someone else, but still applauded the pick. 
 
 “He’s a great judge. I had not heard Merrick is going to be appointed,” he said. “Merrick Garland’s a great judge, and we would support him.” 
 
 Jordain Carney and Mark Hensch contributed. ||||| CLOSE In what's likely to be a political quagmire, President Obama looks to appoint another Supreme Court justice before leaving office. USA TODAY 
 
 President Obama speaks at the Rose Garden with Patricia Millett in June 2013. (Photo: Manuel Balce Ceneta, AP) 
 
 WASHINGTON — Who could replace Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia if Republicans don't block all of President Obama's nominees, as appears likely? Here are 10 possibilities: 
 
 Sri Srinivasan: The 48-year-old federal appeals court judge was confirmed unanimously in 2013 for a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit — a traditional steppingstone to the Supreme Court. He would be the court's first Indian-American justice. 
 
 Patricia Millett: Srinivasan's 52-year-old colleague on the D.C. Circuit is popular in both parties and is frequently mentioned as a possible candidate. She argued 32 cases before the Supreme Court as an advocate. 
 
 Merrick Garland: At 63, Garland is older than most nominees, since presidents want their choices to stick around for decades on the bench. He is a moderate who serves as chief judge on the D.C. Circuit court and could be a compromise choice. 
 
 Kamala Harris: California's attorney general, 51, could be another leading candidate. She has the added luster of holding political office, a life experience that is sorely lacking on the Supreme Court. But she's currently running for the U.S. Senate seat of retiring Sen. Barbara Boxer, so she likely wouldn't want a fated nomination. 
 
 Jacqueline Nguyen: The Asian-American judge, who sits on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, has been mentioned frequently in the initial hours after Scalia's death. At 50, she is the perfect age for a nominee. 
 
 Amy Klobuchar: If the Senate would be less inclined to block one of its own, the senior senator from Minnesota, 55, might be someone Obama would consider. 
 
 Adalberto Jordan: This Cuban-American appellate judge sits on the 11th Circuit, where he was named by Obama in 2012. At 54, he is the right age and could bring a new ethnicity to the court. 
 
 Loretta Lynch: The U.S. attorney general. 56, just went through a lengthy confirmation process and has the scars to prove it. She is a black woman with prosecutorial experience and is being touted as one of the most likely nominees. 
 
 Paul Watford: A judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, Watford, 48, is another Obama nominee with a potentially stellar future. Some court-watchers expect the African-American judge to be Obama's first choice -- but possibly not for a fated nomination. 
 
 Jane Kelly: She is a 51-year-old judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit who was a career public defender. From Iowa, she has enjoyed the prior support of Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, who heads the Senate Judiciary Committee. And Iowa is a purple state. 
 
 More on the death of Justice Scalia: 
 
 CLOSE President Obama remembered and honored Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia who died at the age of 79, and vowed to nominate a replacement. USA TODAY 
 
 Read or Share this story: http://usat.ly/1XqItgU
– President Obama announced his choice to replace Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court: Merrick Garland, chief judge of the US Court of Appeals in Washington, DC. He's "one of America's sharpest legal minds" and is "uniquely qualified," said Obama at the White House Wednesday morning. Some coverage: At 63, Garland is relatively old for a nominee, which may have factored into why he was selected, reports ThinkProgress. At SCOTUSblog, Tom Goldstein writes that Garland "would not be among the Court's most liberal Justices." In his detailed handicapping of the leading choices, he adds that Garland is "very deeply respected." NBC News has a bio, noting that Garland is seen as a "moderate." Garland worked in the Justice Department before becoming a judge, and his leading role in the Oklahoma City bombing case "helped shape" his career, reports the New York Times. He also oversaw the Unabomber case. Garland and his wife have two daughters, notes ABC News in its "everything you need to know" file. The Washington Post digs into some of the political pros and cons of picking Garland, noting that foes have 20 years of decisions to pore over. Garland stood out even as a student back in 1970, notes this tweet of an old newspaper blurb. Garland was confirmed to the DC court in 1997 with the support of seven current GOP senators, notes the AP. But Senate Republicans have vowed to not even allow hearings on any nominee in this election year. Democrats were tying the GOP's opposition to a bill on late-term abortion, reports Politico.