teachers, and trade unionists. Therefore, substantial evidence supports that BIA’s determination that Hernandez failed to demonstrate a nexus to a protected ground, and the record does not compel a contrary finding. Because Hernandez is unable to meet the standard of proof for asylum, she is also unable to meet the higher burden required for withholding of removal. See Al Najjar, 257 F.3d at 1292-93. Accordingly, the record does not compel the conclusion that the BIA’s decisions should be reversed, and we therefore deny Hernandez’s petition. See Ruiz, 479 F.3d at 765. PETITION DENIED. 1 . In addition, Hernandez does not argue on appeal the BIA’s denial of CAT relief. Therefore, that claim is abandoned. See Sepulveda v. U.S. Att'y Gen., 401 F.3d 1226, 1228 n. 2 (11th Cir.2005)
holding that arguments not briefed are abandoned holding that issues not briefed on appeal even by a pro se litigant are deemed abandoned holding issues raised in notice of appeal but not briefed are deemed waived holding that issues not briefed are deemed abandoned holding that generally arguments not briefed on appeal are deemed abandoned or waived