Cervantes-Cruz

MEMORANDUM *

In ruling on the petition before us to review the decision of the Board, “the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA) deprives us of jurisdiction to review the decision by the [Board] to grant or deny a request for voluntary departure.” Garcia v. Ashcroft, 368 F.3d 1157, 1159 (9th Cir. 2004) (citing 8 U.S.C. § 1229c(f)) (internal quotations omitted). We do, however, retain jurisdiction to consider constitutional claims arising from the order of a voluntary departure. See Tovar-Landin v. Ashcroft, 361 F.3d 1164, 1166 (9th Cir. 2004). We also have jurisdiction to review Cervantes-Cruz’s argument that the Board violated its own streamlining regulations. See Kumar v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 520, 523-24 (9th Cir.2006).

Cervantes-Cruz contends that the Board violated his due process rights when it “reduced” his voluntary departure period from sixty to thirty days. This argument is foreclosed by Tovar-Landin . There we held “that aliens have no fundamental right to discretionary relief from removal for purposes of due process” and that “there is no constitutionally protected liberty interest in the discretionary privilege of voluntary…