Yesterday President Barack Obama did what the United States Constitution authorizes him to do. He announced a nominee for the United States Supreme Court. That nominee. Merrick Garland, could be the successor to the recently deceased Antonin Scalia.

He could be the  successor but chances are he won't. It's not because of his personal views or his ability to lead from the bench. It's all because of the country's current political climate.

The issue is that President Obama is about to leave office. A supreme court justice once confirmed by the Senate is on the court for life. There are those that are concerned that the final few months of Obama's term could set the course for legal rulings for decades.

Louisiana Senator David Vitter is among those that believe the newly elected president should be the one to choose the next justice. He told the Louisiana Radio Network.

The people should take the lead in deciding this. Clearly depending on the outcome of the presidential election, very different people would be nominated. Potentially a very different nominee.

Vitter is not alone. There are several members of Congress that have publicly stated that allowing Mr. Obama to make this choice may be a Constitutional right but they don't feel it would be in the best interest of the country given the close proximity of the presidential election.

Vitter says his particular stance is not a negative comment on Mr. Garland.

I announced this approach to the situation well before any particular person was discussed or nominated. There are affirmative plans that there won’t be a hearing.

Senator Vitter who will be retiring at the end of his term this year, serves on the Senate Judiciary Committee. That committee would have to first approve Judge Garland before his nomination would move on to the full Senate. Senator Vitter is on record as saying he will not vote to advance the nomination if and when it is received by his committee.