Should the Republicans move forward with their plan to trample two hundred years of Senate history by attempting the nuclear option, they will have to do it over the objections of the GOP-appointed parliamentarian. Geoff Earle has the story in The Hill:

If Republicans seek to break the Democratic filibuster of judicial nominees, they would have to do so over the objections of the Senate parliamentarian, according to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).

Such objections by the appointed keeper of the Senate’s rules would have little practical effect — since any Republican sitting in the chair would be free to reject or ignore the parliamentarian’s advice. But opposition from an ostensibly neutral staff member could have a political impact, making the GOP tactic appear to be out of bounds.

Even Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) — a strong proponent of breaking the filibuster — acknowledged that “anything right now might have some political value” in the charged debate over judicial nominations.

[...]

Reid received the assurance from the parliamentarian during a private conversation within the past few weeks, according to aides. Reid told reporters this week that the parliamentarian assured him that, if Republicans go through with the move, “they will have to overrule him, because what they are doing is wrong.”

A Congressional Research Service report on the subject, updated this month, leaves little doubt that moves being contemplated by Republicans — specifically a ruling that a supermajority requirement to cut off debate is not in order — would not be based on previous precedents of the Senate.

This might not stop the Republicans outright, but it certainly will make the Democrats' job a little bit easier.