But the judge is correct, and he cites a 1958 US Supreme Court decision to back it up.
If you look at it, the law is very specific on the terms of the crime. Crossing the border is where the crime occurs, and a person can be punished for that crime. Under the law you cited, simply being here after the commission of that crime does not constitute an additional crime.
The judge makes clear that Section 1326 makes it a felony to remain here, if you cross the border after having been previously deported.
Is it a loophole in the law? Probably. But the judge is correct in his interpretation.
Thanks for explaining this. All of this is complex, frustrating, etc, etc, etc.