Case Explained: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT LUIS MIGUEL NAVA-HERNANDEZ v. TODD W. BLANCHE, Acting U.S. Attorney General ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ON PETITION FOR REVIEW FROM THE UNITED STATES BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit Filed: 2026-06-29 The Sixth Circuit denied Luis Miguel Nava-Hernandez’s petition for review seeking cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1). To qualify for this relief, an applicant must demonstrate that their removal would result in “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” to a qualifying relative, defined as hardship significantly different from or greater than what a deported alien’s family member would ordinarily experience. The court applied the substantial evidence standard of review, which requires affirming the Board of Immigration Appeals’ factual findings unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude otherwise. Because the court lacks jurisdiction to reweigh evidence or substitute its judgment for the agency’s on factual matters, it accepted the immigration judge’s finding that Nava-Hernandez’s mother could continue receiving medical care and support from her other children without his financial assistance. The court further noted that Nava-Hernandez failed to provide documentary evidence corroborating his claimed monthly contributions or a direct link between his deportation and a worsening of his mother’s health, while also observing that he likely retains the ability to send money from Mexico and has housing options there. Consequently, the court found substantial evidence supporting the agency’s conclusion that the petitioner did not meet the statutory hardship requirement and affirmed the order of removal. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.