
    Salvador CABALLERO-HERNANDEZ, Petitioner v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., U.S. Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 09-60341
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Feb. 3, 2010.
    Felipe D.J. Millan, El Paso, TX, for Petitioner.
    Elizabeth Young, U.S. Department of Justice Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
    Before JONES, Chief Judge, and DAVIS and WIENER, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Salvador Cabellero-Hernandez petitions this court for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision summarily affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his application for cancellation of removal pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l). Petitioner contests the merits of the IJ’s determination that he was statutorily ineligible for cancellation of removal because he failed to demonstrate the requisite hardship. Further, Petitioner challenges the constitutional basis of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1229b(b) and 1252(a)(2)(B).

“This court lacks jurisdiction to review the IJ’s [discretionary] hardship determination” under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l). Rueda v. Ashcroft, 380 F.3d 831, 831 (5th Cir.2004). Petitioner’s remaining constitutional claims are meritless. Petitioner raises a due process challenge to 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(2) on behalf of his American children, but “[l]egal orders of deportation to their parents do not violate any constitutional right of citizen children.... ” Gonzalez-Cuevas v. INS, 515 F.2d 1222, 1224 (5th Cir.1975). Petitioner next claims that § 1252(a)(2)(B) violates the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), but “the APA does not apply to deportation hearings under [the Immigration and Nationality Act].” Rivera-Cruz v. INS, 948 F.2d 962, 967 n. 5 (5th Cir.1992).

For these reasons, petition for review is DENIED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir R. 47.5.4.
     