Calix v. Attorney General of the United States, 423 F. App'x 240

Calix is a Honduras citizen who entered the U.S. in 1976 and became a lawful permanent resident in 1980.
In 2004 Calix applied for naturalization and admitted voting in the November 2004 election.
In 2008 he was charged as removable for voting in violation of law under 8 U.S.C. §1227(a)(6) for the 2004 vote.
Calix admitted the factual allegation but challenged removability and sought cancellation of removal.
An IJ found him removable and denied cancellation; the BIA dismissed the appeal; Calix timely petitioned for review.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether this court may review the IJ’s termination decision.	Calix argues DHS procedures were not followed.	DHS relies on §1252(g) to bar review of commencement/removal decisions.	We lack jurisdiction to review the termination decision.
Whether substantial evidence supports finding that Calix knowingly violated the New Jersey voting statute.	Calix did not know a citizenship requirement existed.	Government shows willful, knowing violation with signed voter form.	Substantial evidence supports the finding of knowing violation.
Whether the IJ/BIA properly exercised discretion on cancellation of removal and due process claims.	Due process and improper application of stop-time rule; rehabilitation argument.	Discretionary denial reviewed limits; challenge to factual/discretionary determinations rejected.	Discretionary denial affirmed; due process challenges rejected.

Dia v. Ashcroft, 353 F.3d 228 (3d Cir. 2003) (substantial evidence standard; review of factual findings)
Jarbough v. Att’y Gen., 483 F.3d 184 (3d Cir. 2007) (recasting challenges to discretionary determinations as due process claims is insufficient)
Mendez-Moranchel v. Ashcroft, 338 F.3d 176 (3d Cir. 2003) (court’s jurisdiction over discretionary determinations in cancellation of removal)