New Supreme Court Immigration Decison: Scialabba v. Cuellar DeOsorio. Bad news for backlogged children who have aged out

The Associated Press offers a concise and accurate summary of Monday's decision:

"A divided Supreme Court ruled Monday that most immigrant children who have become adults during their parents’ years-long wait to become legal permanent residents of the United States should go to the back of the line in their own wait for visas.
In a 5-4 decision, the justices sided with the Obama administration in finding that immigration laws offer relief only to a tiny percentage of children who “age out” of the system when they turn 21. The majority — tens of thousands of children— no longer qualify for the immigration status granted to minors.
The case is unusual in that it pitted the administration against immigration reform advocates who said government officials were misreading a law intended to keep families together by preventing added delays for children seeking visas."
  - Associated Press, June 9, 2014.

Claros Cantarero v Holder -- new First Circuit gang-related social group case.

New First Circuit case -- no surprise -- a compelling gang related asylum case denied:  Claros Cantarero v Holder,   http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/12-1624P-01A.pdf .  The First Circuit declined to follow the 6th and 7th Circuits in finding that gang members, or former gang members, can constitute a social group.

New First Circuit case on REAL ID

In Guta-Tolossa v Holder, No. 10-2132P (1st Cir. March 16, 2012), The First Circuit addressed the credibility provisions of the REAL ID Act of 2005.  REAL ID has made it more difficult for applicants, particularly asylum seekers, to present their claims, especially if no corroborating evidence is available.  The First Circuit leaves open (for the Board to decide) whether an applicant should be given notice and an opportunity to produce additional evidence if deemed to be otherwise credible.  

This seems only fair:  asylum seekers are often in the worst position to obtain corroborating evidence.  They have fled their countries of origin and may place friends or family members in danger if they try to communicate with them.  If their testimony is credible, that should be enough.  If their testimony is otherwise credible and the Judge determines that it is reasonable to obtain corroborating evidence, the applicant should be allowed to do so.