A month of full-court pressure from Democrats and liberal activist groups appears to have had no effect on Republican Senators’ opposition to approving Judge Merrick Garland for the U.S. Supreme Court.

Garland met with six Republicans this week, including three considered to be vulnerable in November’s elections. Democrats hoped the meetings would cause Senators Rob Portman of Ohio, Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania to back Garland, especially after a two-week recess where President Obama and Democratic leaders made approving Garland a top priority.

Not only did all three continue to stand with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, according to media reports, but Toomey told reporters that he was even more opposed to Garland after their one-hour meeting.

“While I say the judge is without a doubt a very, very smart, very knowledgeable, very pleasant individual, I am more convinced now than I was before that this is a choice that should be made by the next president,” Toomey said.

Republicans have opposed approving any Supreme Court nominee until after a new president is in office in 2017. The result has been a pitched political battle, as well as concerns on both sides of the political aisle over possible 4-4 Supreme Court rulings with the passing of Justice Antonin Scalia.

“We had a very cordial meeting, and I enjoyed the opportunity to meet him,” Portman said in a statement. “As I have said previously, however, I believe the American people should have a voice in this debate. This is a lifetime appointment that could reshape the Supreme Court for generations, and I believe the best thing for the country is to trust the American people to weigh in.”

“I continue to believe the confirmation process should wait until the people have spoken in November,” said Ayotte.

Garland’s record

While Garland is considered by many pundits and others to have a moderate voting record, The New York Times reported on March 16 that putting Garland on the Supreme Court “would make the justice at the center of the court more liberal than at any point in nearly 50 years.” He is considered to be liberal on environmental issues and gun rights; however, he was deferential to President Bush on Guantanamo Bay prisoners and has voted to give latitude to national security and terrorism issues.

There is little on his record related to social issues, though he did rule against giving Priests for Life an en banc review after the group lost a court decision against the Obama administration’s contraception, abortifacient and sterilization mandate.

Judicial Crisis Network Chief Counsel and Policy Director Carrie Severino, however, told The Stream that Garland is more liberal than his reputation. “I don’t think you could have a much more liberal nominee. I think Judge Garland will vote virtually in lockstep with all the other liberal colleagues on the bench” on issues like abortion, the environment, and the economy.

One concern by some Republicans is the nomination of a more liberal justice if Garland is successfully blocked and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton wins the presidency. Severino, however, said the concern was unnecessary. “It’s possible that Hillary Clinton could find someone who is maybe 10, or even 20, years younger than Garland, [but] I don’t think she would find someone with a voting record appreciatively different from Garland on the bench.”

Republican leadership and conservative activists agree — stay the course

Jeremy Adler, Communications Director for the conservative advocacy group American Rising Squared, praised Republicans for standing against Garland.

“Leader McConnell, Chairman Grassley and the Senate Republican Conference are absolutely doing the right thing by allowing the American people to have a voice in the future makeup of the Supreme Court,” Adler wrote in an e-mail. “Conservatives are united in their belief that President Obama should not make a lifetime Supreme Court appointment in the last months of his presidency and voters deserve the right to weigh in on this important debate in November.”

“Leadership and conservatives are arm in arm on this issue,” Adler said, praising McConnell for being “unflinching throughout this debate.”

Severino, whose group is launching ad buys in several states to pressure both Republicans and Democrats to oppose Garland, said that “Democrats recognize [this] week was probably their last best chance to change the direction of the Republicans on this issue” because of the Garland meetings.

However, “the meetings don’t really mean anything,” said Severino. “We see people like Senator Toomey coming out of the meetings even more convinced that Judge Garland does not belong on the Supreme Court.”

Due to the GOP’s consistency, Severino said Democrats “are pivoting” from getting Garland approved to “a politicizing the Court strategy.” Asked whether Republicans did the same by opposing any of Obama’s potential nominees within hours of Scalia’s death, she said that Republicans “are saying we’ll let the people decide” in November. “This is the same strategy that Democrats have said they would have under similar circumstances.”

Severino said Republicans are depoliticizing the nomination process by waiting “until the politics have died down somewhat” after November’s elections.

Three Democrats that Judicial Crisis Network is pressuring to oppose Garland over gun rights, coal and other environmental issues, and unions are Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Michael Bennett of Colorado and Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota. Severino said those Democrats are likely to prioritize the concerns of their constituents, who tend to be more conservative on these issues, over President Obama’s priority of putting Garland on the bench.