¶2 Omar Adrian Rodriguez-Perez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying voluntary departure and a waiver of inadmissibility under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(h). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law and constitutional claims. Vasquez-Zavala v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 1105, 1107 (9th Cir.2003). We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.
¶3 We lack jurisdiction to review Rodriguez-Perez’s contention that the IJ erred and violated due process by failing to inform him of the availability of pre-hearing voluntary departure because Rodriguez-Perez failed to raise this contention before the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir.2004).
¶4 The agency did not err in requiring Rodriguez-Perez to establish the good moral character required under 8 U.S.C. § 1229c(b)(1)(B). See 8 C.F.R. § 1240.26(b)(1)(i)(A)-(B).
¶5 Assuming without deciding that Rodriguez-Perez has standing to raise his equal protection challenge to 8 U.S.C. § 1182(h), we conclude that Rodriguez-Perez’s claim is foreclosed on the merits by Taniguchi v. Schultz, 303 F.3d 950, 957-58 (9th Cir.2002).
¶6 PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.