Brenda Carolina Boche was convicted, following a bench trial on stipulated facts, of being illegally present in the United States after deportation following an aggravated felony conviction. Boche was sentenced to a 55-month term of imprisonment.

For the first time on appeal, Boche challenges the constitutionality of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)’s treatment of prior felony and aggravated felony convictions as sentencing factors rather than elements of the offense that must be found by a jury in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). Boche contends that her conviction should be reduced to one under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a)(2) and the judgment reformed to reflect conviction only under that provision.

Boche’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, *344140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). Although Boche contends that Almendarez-Torres 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). Boche properly concedes that her argument is foreclosed in light of Almendarez-Torres and circuit precedent, but she raises it here to preserve it for further review.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.