Sergio Carrasco-Flores appeals the 24-month sentence imposed following his plea of guilty to one count of unlawful reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. In his sole issue on appeal, Carrasco-Flores raises arguments that are foreclosed by United States v. Gomez-Herrera, 523 F.3d 554, 557-64 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 624, 172 L.Ed.2d 617 (2008), which held that any disparity in sentencing between fast-track and non-fast-track jurisdictions is a function of Congressional policy and is not “unwarranted” under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(6). Carrasco-Flores concedes as much but asserts that he wishes to preserve the issue for further review. Carrasco-Flores raised additional sentencing arguments in the district court, which he does not raise here. He also appealed the revocation of a previously-imposed term of supervised release, and the two appeals were consolidated. As the sole issue raised in his brief pertains to the foreclosed fast-track disparity argument, he has abandoned all other issues. See United States v. Trujillo, 502 F.3d 353, 360 & n. 30 (5th Cir. 2007).

The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. The Government’s motion to dismiss and its alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief are DENIED as unnecessary.