Trump made the unconventional decision to release a list of potential Supreme Court nominees in May 2016, when he was the presumptive Republican nominee, in an effort to soothe some on the right uncomfortable with the notion of his populist-fueled candidacy.

While Sanders allowed that he could “maybe” see the value in releasing such a list in what could be a drawn-out Democratic primary, he warned that such questions — like asking who a candidate would consider as a running mate — before voters have begun to cast ballots was premature.

“Got to kind of win the nomination first. I’m kind of struggling to do that,” he told the editorial board. “And I want to do that. But you know, it’s not a bad idea. It’s a reasonable idea.”

Noting that “my wife agrees” with that idea, he added: “Yeah. I’ll take that into consideration. Nothing wrong with that. As to who I’ll potential nominees [sic] for the Supreme Court would be. Yep.”

Trump’s first Supreme Court shortlist, which contained 11 names, came under criticism at the time for its lack of gender and racial diversity and raised eyebrows in legal circles for snubbing some long-considered contenders for a GOP nominee. In September 2016, he released a longer, more diverse list that many credit for helping win over uneasy conservatives. Trump has continued to use his lists for the two vacancies he’s filled on the court thus far.

In Sanders’ interview with the Times editorial board, he refused to disclose any names that might appear on his shortlist, but reiterated his pledge that “I will never appoint anybody who was not 100 percent Roe v. Wade.”

The senator also railed against the politicization of the court in recent years, echoing arguments Trump too has made, and dismissing Chief Justice John Roberts’ efforts to downplay the ideological divide of the court.

“And in general, I think, especially in recent years, the Supreme Court, despite what they may say — what Justice Roberts and others may say — they are a very political group of people and too often they are beholden to right-wing special interests and corporate interests,” he asserted. “So the person that I would appoint would not only be 100 percent Roe v. Wade, would be somebody who understands [the] plight of the working class in this country, who is prepared to stand up to the power of corporate interests.”

Sanders was also asked how he would wage a confirmation battle for such an ideological nominee if faced with a Mitch McConnell-led Republican Senate after McConnell famously blocked President Barack Obama’s election-year nominee in 2016.

After first sidestepping the question, Sanders returned to an argument he’s made before, that he would use populist appeals in an attempt to pressure McConnell and Republicans, though public polling at the time showed a majority supported confirming Obama's 2016 nominee, Merrick Garland.

“It is an important question and the answer is you fight for that person,” he said. “And you make the case to the American people — not that I’ve appointed that person, not just because I like him or her, but these are the values that that person has and why we need that person on the Supreme Court.”