Sure, now what happens when different courts rule on this differently?

Eventually it will reach the Supreme Court if it is appealed.

And what about right now (or rather, after the thirty day stay expires)?

It is a feature not a bug to have legal fragmentation in our judicial system. That’s how it was setup.

Enforcement and effect can vary temporarily due to conflicting judicial rulings thus creating short-term legal fragmentation until it's resolved at a higher level

We used to have this feature and not a bug of having different takes on slavery legality in the US. You might know how this ended.

The state of people either having or not having citizenship defined by either statewide injunction was or wasn’t issued is pure chaos and pretty much indefensible.

That’s not really a fair comparison. Slavery was a systemic moral atrocity, and its resolution required constitutional amendments and a civil war.

Legal fragmentation on injunctions isn’t about denying people’s humanity; it’s about how courts balance power between branches and avoid overstepping.

To be honest I think this one is worse in a way because it permits laws impartiality in hands of bad faith executive (and we do have one).

In this very example people in the US split into two parts: living in states choosing to go against this very illegal executive order or not. Unless you have money to sue government yourself and didn’t end up in a state going against EO your child is gonna be denied the exact humanity you’re talking about. In fact they can be deported soon after being born as assumingly non citizens.

And yes, in this particular case probably it will turn ok, because class certification seem possible. However class certification is very limited at the moment, and, again, in hands of bad faith executive we’ll end up with executive orders built around it. For example we can end up with 10% religious tax (but only if you Muslim). When the case finally reaches the merits just cancel it and change to 12%. This might be non class certifiable, and will create both chaos and inequitable application of the law.

If judges really wanted to solve initial issue of conflicting decisions (not fragmented, since universal injunctions were making decision universal) they should’ve fixed class actions first.

I’m pretty sure we’ll see this all to play out really soon.