Exactly. The judgment was about deportation. The judge did not directly address the definition of "wife," "children," "job," or "Chicago," either. He accepted them as facts--just as he accepted the natural-born citizenship of the children as a fact. You may think he was wrong to do so, but to argue that he didn't do it at all is a little nuts.
Actually, that's not entirely true. The judge did address the wife:
Diaz-Salazar in fact was separated from a wife and two children whom he had left in Mexico in 1974. Thus the woman with whom he lived in Chicago and by whom he had two children born here was not his wife, although he seems to have considered her so.