nb, there is an excellent article here which reviews the ruling:
http://www.nationalreview.com/node/398820/print
"DAPA was decreed on November 20, 2014, in a series of memorandums, without any opportunity for the public to comment beforehand. Judge Hanen found fatal the governments failure to comply with the notice-and-comment requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). But the court went further, finding that DAPA was not an exercise or prosecutorial discretion. Rather, DAPA amounted to a decision to consciously and expressly adopt[] a general policy that is so extreme as to amount to an abdication of its statutory responsibilities. The president was willfully disregarding the laws of Congress that he did not agree with. Specifically, DAPA does not simply constitute inadequate enforcement; it is an announced program of non-enforcement of the law that contradicts Congress statutory goals. This policy, Hanen concluded, is unlawful and must be halted."
It appears that Josh Blackman of National Review finds that the court held that nonenforcement is a violation of law per se and not merely for procedural reasons. That is good news, if so.