I can tell opinions vary about my joke.

LOL!!!

"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.

The article reports that it is "partially" unconstitutional, but doesn't say what he let go by. These cases should not even have to come up. Usually, even when they lose there is some precedent set in the decision that further negates the constitution. What is it this time?

If illegal alien families are broken up, they are doing it to themselves by coming here illegally, then demanding that we fix it for them.

Good light from the pages of the constitution.

Wait wait... duh.

they like a good fire. so they do not see that rome is burning.

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

tragically you are right.

We are just too much trouble, demanding our sovereign rights and individual liberty.
The elite much prefer a citizenry that is accustomed to serfdom, like from most latin countries south of the US.

Highly doubtful. The Rs seem intent on strategizing to gain a firmer more lasting choke-hold on power. They've already screwed us, the American people, over with Ominbus and, if they think the illegals can be persuaded to vote for them should they achieve citizenship, they'd step on us in a heartbeat. We, the American people, stopped having representation in our government quite some time ago.

".... and to stop the break-up of families due to deportation"

When a mother and/or father breaks up their family by violating a just law, THEY are responsible, not Big Daddy in the District of Criminals.

but will it be stopped?

Comrade citizens, this ruling is racist. Why?
When the Emperor wears no clothes, you don't see his white half.

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.

Don't doubt it.

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.

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