Once upon a time... A paper was submitted to a journal with the consent and knowledge of all co-authors. During the revision process, one of the co-authors (X) demanded co-authorship in the articles of other co-authors (Y and Z). This request was denied, as X did not meet the requirements of co-authorship in those papers. As an answer, X refused to allow the article to go forward, until one of the co-authors (N) being excluded. X explained this decision by questioning the contribution of N to the research. What might be a diplomatic and professional solution, if N and X are both valid co-authors? Can X cut the whole paper? All characters and other entities appearing in this question are fictitious. Any resemblance to real persons or other real-life entities is purely coincidental.
Generally speaking, you can't publish something without the consent of all authors, so yes, it can happen.
This person is behaving badly. Perhaps there is a common authority you can appeal to so that the bad behavior stops. Even a threat to appeal to higher authority might make a difference.
It might be necessary, actually, to abandon the paper if you can't find a solution.
But don't work with this person in the future. If it is a PI/advisor, then you have a different issue, of course, as such people have power that can overwhelm justice. But, to the maximum extent possible, ignore the opinions of this person who is trying to optimize their own record at the expense of others.
But if it is a PI/advisor doing this, say so, and I can supplement this response.