They won't want him. They want to reinterpret the entire Constitution until it is unrecognizable. They need an extremely conservative activist justice who would sneak off to secret meetings with anti-government plotters, but they would settle for a solidly dependable conservative vote. They wouldn't get that with Governor Sandoval.
Plus, ultraconservatives are scarred and bitter by many decades of naming conservatives to the court only to find them "moving left" in their decisions. Of course, it's not that they really move left so much as that far right ideology is at odds with constitutional law and can't be justified. Except by people like Scalia who pretend to worship the Constitution, mine it for excuses to rule as they wish, and toss it aside if it contradicts those wishes.
In any case, the nation will see Obama offering a candidate both sides can accept -- one the Senate approved unanimously for a judgeship in 2005!, and very likely see the GOP blocking even that as usual. Or the GOP could approve a candidate even the most wishful do not mistake for the man they want. 
But I'm guessing this is a first move, with more to come. This is an election year and the stakes in this extremely high-skill game for top-level players are enormous. Oh, and remember, President Obama is himself a constitutional scholar. He's no dummy.
By President Barack Obama on Feb 24, 2016 at 8:00 am
The Constitution vests in the President the power to appoint judges to the Supreme Court. It’s a duty that I take seriously, and one that I will fulfill in the weeks ahead. It’s also one of the most important decisions that a President will make. Rulings handed down by the Supreme Court directly affect our economy, our security, our rights, and our daily lives.
Needless to say, this isn’t something I take lightly. It’s a decision to which I devote considerable time, deep reflection, careful deliberation, and serious consultation with legal experts, members of both political parties, and people across the political spectrum. And with thanks to SCOTUSblog for allowing me to guest post today, I thought I’d share some spoiler-free insights into what I think about before appointing the person who will be our next Supreme Court Justice.
First and foremost, the person I appoint will be eminently qualified. He or she will have an independent mind, rigorous intellect, impeccable credentials, and a record of excellence and integrity. I’m looking for a mastery of the law, with an ability to hone in on the key issues before the Court, and provide clear answers to complex legal questions.
Second, the person I appoint will be someone who recognizes the limits of the judiciary’s role; who understands that a judge’s job is to interpret the law, not make the law. I seek judges who approach decisions without any particular ideology or agenda, but rather a commitment to impartial justice, a respect for precedent, and a determination to faithfully apply the law to the facts at hand. ...
http://www.scotusblog.com/
[div class=Some Democrats believe that nominating Sandoval could fracture the front of Republican opposition and force McConnell to take up the nomination in this contentious election year. It would also put on the spot a handful of Senate Republicans who are up for reelection in blue states in November.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/02/24/brian-sandoval-republican-governor-of-nevada-is-being-vetted-for-supreme-court-vacancy/?postshare=1491456337269807&tid=ss_tw
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
= new reply since forum marked as read