...On the fundamental grounds of a Scotus pick made by a de facto ex president under criminal investigation. As well as the fundamental grounds that the Republicans may have irreversibly tarnished the independance of the court by blocking, for an entire year, the legitimate nominee of a former sitting president.
What will they do if this nominee, subsequently forced through acceptance by the Republican majority, is then a potentially deciding vote for a constitutional crisis engineered by that same de facto ex president? What will the American people be left to think when that decision favors that same de facto ex president?
Unfortunately, since they didn't have the cajones to boycott the entire process from the beginning, as completely illegitimate (see this argument described by Dahlia Lithwick talking with Rachel Maddow), they start with a good deal less moral authority on the matter, but that must not stop them from trying to block this appointment with whatever means they still have available. And they must do this precisely on the fundamental grounds just presented. At the very least they should be asking this court pick whether he would recuse himself from such a critical court vote, with the de facto ex president at the center of it.
Time will tell I guess.