I suppose next the federal judge will be removed as a message to all other federal judges who dare rule against it...

I like this part of the story:
The White House defends the policy as a reasonable use of Mr. Obama’s powers to set priorities for enforcing laws, and to stop the break-up of families due to deportation.

Since when is stopping the breakup of families due to deportation an overriding requirement to what the Federal Government should be doing?

I answer my own question. They don't care about what it SHOULD be doing.

"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong." Judge Napolitano
I hope this judge has good security.

We are a nation made up of immigrants. If we deported every person that is not here by invitation of a natural born citizen, then a good 85% of the population would be deported. But after one is born on USA soil, one is a born citizen, there for only those that are recently immigrated are subject to the deportation as you are presenting this. Still why should I comment since the "natives" were never asked nor given the right to a say in government until the mid 30's. But no matter which way you slice this story the point is the person violated the law of the land and is not a citizen there for he is by law subject to deportation. So that is the only point in this subject that comes under question is "Obama's right" to pardon someone subject to deportation, since a pardon is for criminal wrong doings, the answer is no... a pardon is not what is the correct choice of action, political asylum would be the correct thing to do but the man is still subject to the law for the crime.

Wait wait... duh.

Glad to find a sane Federal Judge.
Too bad The Supremes haven't decided the issue yet instead of sitting around singing "Mister Postman."

but will it be stopped?

This, from another article, is very precise.

Schwab wrote:

President Obama’s executive action goes beyond prosecutorial discretion because: (a) it provides for a systematic and rigid process by which a broad group of individuals will be treated differently than others based upon arbitrary classifications, rather than case-by-case examination; and (b) it allows undocumented immigrants, who fall within these broad categories, to obtain substantive rights.

perhaps the chief justice could have his clerk find a legal basis for ruling in favor of the King, delete that, President.

Of course it is unconstitutional. But I am sure there is something written in making it a tax so it will stand. [sarcasm]