With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". had been repealed for aliens placed in removal proceedings on or after April 1, 1997. See IIRIRA § 309(c)(1). At the hearing, the IJ informed Walker and the Huieoeheas that in light of the statutory amendments, the only relief even potentially available to them was a discretionary procedure known as “cancellation of removal.” See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b). An alien must demonstrate ten years of continuous physical presence in the United States prior to applying for this new form of relief. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l)(A). Furthermore, according to the “stop-time rule,” an alien’s continual presence in the United States is deemed to end once the INS begins removal proceedings by serving a Notice to Appear. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(d)(l); Tefel v. Reno, 180 F.3d 1286, 1289 (11th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>). Unaware of Huicochea-Gomez’s eleven-month

A: holding that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to review aliens eligibility for special rule cancellation of removal
B: holding that the new stoptime rule applies to all aliens applying for either suspension of deportation under the old law or cancellation of removal under the iirira amendments
C: holding that neither aedpa nor iirira expressly repeals the availability of habeas review of deportation or removal orders
D: holding that because petitioners proceedings commenced after the enactment of iirira petitioner was statutorily ineligible for suspension of deportation
B.