Jose Alfredo Pena-Garza appeals his guilty plea conviction and sentence for illegal reentry after having been previously deported following a prior aggravated felony conviction. He argues that the “felony” and “aggravated felony” provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and (2) are unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000) and contends that his challenge is not barred by the appeal-wavier provision in his plea agreement. The Government seeks enforcement of the waiver provision. We need not decide the applicability of the waiver language in Pena-Garza’s plea agreement because the only issue that Pena-Garza raises is foreclosed.

Although Pena-Garza contends that Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light of Apprendi, we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that Almendarez-Torres remains binding. See United States v. Garza-Lopez, 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 298, 163 L.Ed.2d 260 (2005). Pena-Garza properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of Almendarez-Torres and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review.

AFFIRMED.