President Obama and Senate leaders will meet on Wednesday to discuss how long it will take to approve his Supreme Court nominee, a question that could delay the president's announcing his pick.

    Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.), Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) and Sens. Pat Leahy (D-Vt.) and Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), the senior members of the Judiciary Committee, will sit down with Obama on Wednesday to discuss the high court.

    The question of timing appears to weigh more heavily on the president's mind than what type of candidates to consider.

    A source familiar with White House discussions said Obama has had a shortlist of candidates for months.

    With an August recess of up to nearly a month, Obama needs to give the Senate enough time to confirm his pick before leaving town. But if he announces his choice next week or in early June and confirmation drags on, the recess could push a final vote into September, leaving his nominee twisting in the political winds for three months.

    The last time the Senate's Democratic and GOP leaders joined the senior members of the Judiciary panel at the White House for a similar discussion was in 2005, before former President George W. Bush selected Chief Justice John Roberts.

    Leahy said lawmakers would "certainly" discuss the timing of the confirmation process, which did not come up during the 2005 meeting. Back then, lawmakers stuck to the question of what kind of justice Bush might pick and what goals he hoped to accomplish through the selection.

    Leahy said he would urge the president to consider someone from "outside the judicial monastery," not an appellate court judge.

    But while Democrats favor a judge with "real-world experience" who can "empathize" with average people, Republicans such as Sessions prefer a practicing jurist with recognized legal accomplishment who would promise to show "fidelity" to the Constitution.

    (Bush did not hold a meeting with Democrats prior to tapping the more conservative Justice Samuel Alito.)

    Democrats expect a partisan battle over Obama's pick and do not want it to become protracted.

    "I do think he has to be sensitive of an ability of a getting a nominee confirmed," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), a member of the Judiciary Committee. "The history, going back, of the confirmation of Supreme Court justices is very partisan. So, therefore, there is merit to avoiding a partisan fight."

    Lawmakers and activists who follow judiciary issues closely point to signs that Obama has three or four candidates to replace retiring Justice David Souter firmly in mind.

    The suspects are Sonia Sotomayor, a judge on the 2nd U.S. Court of Appeals; Diane Pamela Wood, a member of the 7th circuit; Elena Kagan, Obama's solicitor general; Kathleen Sullivan, former dean of Stanford Law School; and Jennifer Granholm, Michigan's Democratic governor.

    Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), a member of the Judiciary Committee and one of Obama's closest allies in the Senate, said it would be "naïve" for lawmakers to think that they can change the president's mind about whom to pick for the court.

    "I notice some of my colleagues are suggesting some of their favorite nominees," said Durbin. "I think that is maybe naïve.

    "This president, as deeply as he's been involved in constitutional law and appreciates the history and gravity of this decision, has thought through the kinds of people he would seriously consider."

    A senior Democratic aide said that lawmakers had surmised, from the same few names that have surfaced repeatedly in the press, that Obama has settled on his finalists.

    Liberal activists have drawn the same conclusion.

    "We've all seen the names and they seem to be repeated so often that they have to be taken as the ones at the top of the list," said Bill Yeomans, legal director at the Alliance for Justice, a liberal group expected to defend Obama's pick from conservative attack.

    The view that Obama's mind is all but made up prompted members of the Senate Judiciary Committee to predict that Obama would announce a nominee immediately.

    But last week passed without an announcement, and the White House spokesman has told reporters not to expect anything this week either.

    It appears instead that Obama would like to get a sense of how long the confirmation process will take before unveiling his choice to public scrutiny.

    Given Obama's broad popularity and Democratic control of 59 Senate seats, Obama's choice is expected to win easy confirmation.

    But Republicans can use Senate rules to delay the confirmation by a few crucial weeks, pushing it into August and the scheduled congressional break. Obama may want to announce his choice at the beginning of July to leap the confirmation debate over the August recess, but the danger is that it will then run up against consideration of healthcare reform and other major initiatives scheduled for the fall.

    GOP leaders are demanding at least as much time to scrutinize Obama's choice as Democrats had to review Roberts and Alito.

    That means it will take at least 70 days to confirm Obama's choice. If the nominee sparks unforeseen controversy, the process could take longer.

    Bush named Roberts on July 19, 2005, and the Senate voted to confirm him on Sept. 29. Alito had to wait 92 days from when he was named to the court to when the Senate approved him.

    "I think everyone in the Senate would agree that the nominee ought to be a highly qualified, experienced lawyer," McConnell told reporters Tuesday. "There's a certain amount of time that needs to occur between nomination and confirmation so you can review the record thoroughly, and we have two recent examples of having done it in an appropriate way: Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito."