Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

jurisdictionappealjudicial review
jurisdictionappealjudicial review

Related Cases

N.Y. v. Wolf
View Case »
F-B-O-, Matter of;
View Case »
Zafar v. U.S. Attorney Gen.
View Case »
Gomez-Chavez v. Perryman
View Case »
Vyloha v. Barr
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Meraz-Reyes v. Gonzales

Facts

Petitioner Jesus Meraz-Reyes, a citizen of Mexico unlawfully present in the United States, conceded removability and applied for cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. 1229b, or in the alternative, voluntary departure. An immigration judge denied cancellation of removal but granted voluntary departure with an alternative order of removal to Mexico. In denying cancellation of removal, the immigration judge found that the petitioner failed to establish that his removal would result in an 'extraordinary and extremely unusual hardship' to his eight-year-old, United States-citizen child. The petitioner appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), and the BIA affirmed.

Petitioner Jesus Meraz-Reyes, a citizen of Mexico unlawfully present in the United States, conceded removability and applied for cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. 1229b, or in the alternative, voluntary departure. An immigration judge denied cancellation of removal but granted voluntary departure with an alternative order of removal to Mexico. In denying cancellation of removal, the immigration judge found that the petitioner failed to establish that his removal would result in an 'extraordinary and extremely unusual hardship' to his eight-year-old, United States-citizen child. The petitioner appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), and the BIA affirmed.

Issue

Whether the court has jurisdiction to review the BIA's denial of the petitioner's application for cancellation of removal.

Whether the court has jurisdiction to review the BIA's denial of the petitioner's application for cancellation of removal.

Rule

Courts generally lack jurisdiction to review denials of petitions for cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. 1252(a)(2)(B)(i), which states that no court shall have jurisdiction to review any judgment regarding the granting of relief under section 1229b.

Courts generally lack jurisdiction to review denials of petitions for cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. 1252(a)(2)(B)(i), which states that no court shall have jurisdiction to review any judgment regarding the granting of relief under section 1229b.

Analysis

The court found that the petitioner did not identify any reviewable claim and did not argue that the BIA failed to recognize its discretionary authority or relied upon an unconstitutional factor. Instead, the petitioner challenged the BIA's determination regarding the hardship claim, which was a discretionary determination shielded from judicial review by Congress. Therefore, the court concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to review the BIA's decision.

The court found that the petitioner did not identify any reviewable claim and did not argue that the BIA failed to recognize its discretionary authority or relied upon an unconstitutional factor. Instead, the petitioner challenged the BIA's determination regarding the hardship claim, which was a discretionary determination shielded from judicial review by Congress. Therefore, the court concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to review the BIA's decision.

Conclusion

The petition for review was denied.

The petition for review was denied.

Who won?

The government prevailed in the case because the court found it lacked jurisdiction to review the BIA's discretionary decision regarding cancellation of removal.

The government prevailed in the case because the court found it lacked jurisdiction to review the BIA's discretionary decision regarding cancellation of removal.

You must be