Maybe he did. In which case the fix is to appeal the decision up the chain of command to the circuit court.
And if you want an actual reasoned, and (relatively) well thought out argument from r why the judge is wrong, I would recommend this blog post by patterico: http://patterico.com/2018/04/25/federal-judge-to-hell-with-trump-long-live-barack-obamas-daca-program/
What I get tired of is the ersatz-apocalyptic nonsense being vomited on this thread. The judge in this case, ruled on the basis that, under the Administrative Procedures Act, the Trump administration did not properly follow the law in making its decision to end the Obama EO because it didn’t adequately explain its finding that the Obama EO was illegal.
If that finding is wrong, it should fail as a conclusion of law, not a finding of fact, which means that a reviewing court should be able to review it de novo, that is, without giving much deference to the trial judge’s decision.
Judges make mistakes all the time, that’s why we have appellate courts. If this judge is wrong, and I tend to think he is, then an appeal by the Trump administration should fix it.
So, perhaps a little less hyperbole by all posting here, and a little more attention to detail, is in order.
i read the piece you cited, and to be honest, it's essentially saying the same thing the non-lawyers are saying here. It was a garbage decision.
1. It's the court's framing of the question itself - "was Obama's action illegal under the APA", that was flawed. The basis of Obama's EO was that he had the discretion as to how to enforce the law, and given how he chose to ecercise it, he had the discretion to grant some legal status to people who were not going to be targetted. So for this judge to argue that EO can only be overturned if it was
illegal ignores that it was based on a
discretionary decision by a former President.
That is utter garbage, and even if the non-lawyers here lack the training to frame their criticism in the appropriate verbiage, the essence of their reaction is completely correct. This is an outrageous, garbage decision for which impeachment is a perfectly valid (though politically unrealitic) option. Either this judge is flat out stupid, and honestly does not understand the DACA is premised on a discretionary enforcement decision, or does understand but simply doesn't care. There isn't a third option.
2. Additionally, this trash jurist didn't even stay his national injunction pending appeal - only reconsideration.
This is a purely policy-driven decision. He's a scumbucket who doesn't believe in Constitutional separation of powers.
Either that, or he's literally too stupid to be a federal judge.
The proper response to this is appeal, but if the stay isn't extended during appeal, Trump should ignore the order and provoke a Constitutional crisis if necessary.