CNN’s Elie Honig shocked anchor Kate Bolduan by explaining how the Supreme Court’s recent ruling could plunge the country into chaos over birthright citizenship, with states potentially having conflicting laws on who qualifies as an American citizen.

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to curb lower courts’ power to impose nationwide injunctions, allowing Trump’s executive order ending automatic citizenship for children of illegal aliens to proceed in some states while challenges continue in others. But the high court did not address the core constitutional question of birthright citizenship, leaving the door open for states to enforce different rules.

Honig told Bolduan on “CNN News Central” that 22 states suing to block Trump’s order could end up with one set of rules while the 28 states not suing could enforce another, creating a patchwork where a child born in New Jersey could be a citizen, but a child born under identical circumstances in Pennsylvania might not be.

“That is wild,” Bolduan reacted. Honig agreed, describing the scenario as “chaotic” and predicting the Supreme Court will ultimately be forced to take up the case to resolve the legal mess.

Trump’s January executive order, “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,” aims to end automatic citizenship for children of illegal aliens and certain visa holders, arguing it cheapens citizenship and strains taxpayer resources. The administration has cited the Founders’ original intent and the 14th Amendment’s language to justify the move.

Critics, including Democrats and legacy media figures, have framed the order as unconstitutional and racist, but Trump’s team argues it’s about restoring the integrity of citizenship and ending incentives for illegal immigration.

Will Chamberlain of the Article III Project defended Trump’s push, telling the Daily Caller News Foundation it’s the administration’s duty to protect classified information and policy integrity even when Democrats and their media allies try to undermine it through leaks or obstruction.

The new legal landscape follows years of complaints from conservatives about the abuse of universal injunctions by activist judges to block Trump’s policies nationwide, from immigration restrictions to energy and tax reforms.

As the legal battles continue, states may find themselves in a standoff, testing the limits of federal and state authority over immigration and citizenship in ways unseen in modern American history. The fight over who is considered a citizen at birth is now front and center, and the final word will likely come from the Supreme Court.

With the 2026 midterms approaching, the clash over Trump’s birthright citizenship order could become a defining issue, highlighting the divide between red states determined to enforce immigration laws and blue states eager to maintain open-border policies under the guise of constitutional interpretation.