The Supreme Court seemed divided over eliminating judges’ ability to issue nationwide injunctions at blockbuster oral arguments Thursday, even as no justice defended the constitutionality of Trump’s birthright citizenship order that underpins the case.

Though several conservative justices expressed concerns during the two-and-a-half hour argument that judges are overstepping their authority by not limiting their rulings to the specific parties suing, it remained unclear whether the administration had convinced a majority to claw back the practice.

The decision is poised to greatly impact Trump’s ability to enact his executive orders by potentially removing a key tool that plaintiffs have employed in dozens of lawsuits to try to stop Trump’s agenda, ranging from actions over federal grant freezes to transgender troops to birthright citizenship.

"We survived until the 1960s without universal injunctions,” said conservative Justice Clarence Thomas, a longtime skeptic of such rulings.

As the challengers raised concerns........

© The Hill