CHRIS CUOMO (HOST): Let's do it this way. I don't want to let you have your vote. I don't want to do it because politically it is bad for me. I don't want to risk you giving us a nominee that we may have to appoint because of any process. I don't like it. I'm a Republican. I want to save it until afterwards. That's my position. What's wrong with that? 

MAGGIE HABERMAN: Well, there is no precedent for there not being some kind of appointment in an election year. We wrote about this in the Times today, number one. Number two, it's not just that Mitch McConnell is saying we are not going to let this go through. He's basically saying to the president, don't even bother. And then followed it up with American people deserve a say. This goes to a deeper issue for Democrats, which is Democrats have argued Republicans for a long time have refused to acknowledge that the president is actually the sitting president. We have a very long time until the election. That's why. It is certainly the Republicans' prerogative to say exactly what you just said. We have seen it for the last couple of years, ever since a rules change in the Senate. It's not a surprise given how partisan D.C. is now, this is not a shock given what we have seen over many years. But I do think it is a risk for Republicans for the reason we just heard. You could see the president appoint somebody who basically meets a bunch of demographic boxes essentially, and who the Republicans look like they are being [re]calcitrant by refusing to appoint, and that could help Democrats.

Previously: 

ABC's Stephanopoulos: “This Sounds Like A New Rule ... That A President Can't Pick A Supreme Court Justice In His Or Her Final Year”

CNN Analyst: Potential SCOTUS Nominees “Have Impeccable Qualifications,” But GOP Doesn't Want To Vote For “An Obama Nominee”

On CNN, Hugh Hewitt Makes Up A New Rule For SCOTUS Nominations: “Lame Ducks Don't Make Lifetime Appointments”