Ramirez

Ramirez v. Ashcroft

Good Law
113 F. App'x 238
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 29, 2004No. 03-72635California287 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Nicolas Araiza Ramirez, his wife, Gabriela Araiza Ruvalcaba, and their two children, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of their application for cancellation of removal. Although we lack jurisdiction to review discretionary hardship determinations, Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 892 (9th Cir.2003), we retain jurisdiction over, and review de novo, constitutional claims, Torres-Aguilar v. INS, 246 F.3d 1267, 1271 (9th Cir.2001). To the extent we have jurisdiction, it is conferred by 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.

*240 To the degree petitioners challenge the IJ’s hardship finding, we lack jurisdiction to review that discretionary determination. See Romero-Torres, 327 F.3d at 892 .

We find unpersuasive petitioners’ contention that the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act violates equal protection. See Jimenez-Angeles v. Ashcroft, 291 F.3d 594, 602-03 (9th Cir.2002).

We also find unpersuasive petitioners’ contention that the IJ violated their equal…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.