In the context of an asylum claim raised by a gay Mexican man, the Ninth Circuit has determined that credible written and oral testimony that reporting private harm is futile and potentially dangerous, that other young gay men had reported their abuse to the Mexican police to no avail, and country reports and news articles documenting official and private persecution of individuals on account of their sexual orientation—satisfies the Court's longstanding evidentiary standards for establishing past persecution. In so doing, the court overruled its prior decision in Castro-Martinez v. Holder to the extent that it held that the failure to report harm by private parties to the police created an evidentiary gap, particularly when the harm is inflicted on a child. The en banc decision is a terrific victory for the LGBT immigrant community, breathing new life into Mexican LGBT asylum claims.
The full text of the en banc decision in Bringas-Rodriguez v. Sessions can be found here:
http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2017/03/08/13-72682.pdf