Rodas
Rodas v. Gonzales
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Jorge Alfredo Giron Rodas and his wife Maria Alvarado Garcia, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order affirming without opinion an immigration judge’s decision denying their applications for cancellation of removal. To the extent we have jurisdiction, it is conferred by 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review de novo constitutional claims in immigration proceedings. See Ram v. INS, 243 F.3d 510, 516 (9th Cir.2001). We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary determination that the petitioners failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship. See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 929-30 (9th Cir.2005).
The petitioners’ equal protection challenge to the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (“NACARA”) is foreclosed by our decision in JimenezAngeles v. Ashcroft, 291 F.3d 594 , 602-03 (9th Cir.2002) (“Congress’s decision to afford more favorable treatment to certain aliens ‘stems from a rational diplomatic *489 decision to encourage such aliens to remain in the United States’ ”).