An asylum applicant’s credibility is the decisive issue in most cases. The REAL ID Act made the line between truth and lies more consequential. Although REAL ID establishes a uniform statutory framework, circuit courts diverge sharply on how credibility is determined—creating circuit splits that affect whether you win or lose. This CLE examines the well-founded fear standard with a practical focus on how courts assess inconsistencies, omissions, demeanor, and plausibility under the “totality of the circumstances,” and the need for corroboration. Designed for practicing attorneys, this CLE translates circuit differences into concrete advocacy strategies. Attendees will learn how credibility doctrines vary by jurisdiction, how minor discrepancies are treated on appeal, when omissions undermine—or do not undermine— a client’s testimony, and how to anticipate and counter adverse credibility findings. This session equips practitioners to better develop the record, frame credibility arguments, and navigate circuit-specific risks when litigating asylum claims.