Castaneda

Castaneda v. Gonzales

Good Law
207 F. App'x 802
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 15, 2006No. 05-75733California318 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Adrian Garcia Castaneda and his wife, Lucivia Garcia, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying their applications for cancellation of removal. To *803 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, 248 F.3d 510, 516 (9th Cir.2001). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

The petitioners’ equal protection challenge to the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act is foreclosed by our decision in Jimenez-Angeles 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 decision to encourage such aliens to remain in the United States’ ”).

The petitioners’ constitutional challenge to the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 is unavailing. See Ram, 243 F.3d at 517 (holding that Congress was entitled to change standards for relief and application of the new standards…

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.