The Supreme Court recently made a surprising decision. They overturned the murder conviction of Richard Glossip, who has been on Oklahoma's death row since 1998. This case is unusual because the Supreme Court, known for its conservative leanings, rarely sides with death row inmates. The court's decision was split 5-3, with Justice Neil Gorsuch not participating.

The court found that the prosecution violated Glossip's rights. They hid important information from the defense and let a key witness lie under oath. The witness, Justin Sneed, was the one who actually committed the murder. He testified that Glossip had hired him to kill their boss, Barry Van Treese. But prosecutors knew Sneed had a history of mental health issues and had been prescribed lithium. They also knew Sneed had lied about seeing a psychiatrist.

The state attorney general, Gentner Drummond, agreed that the conviction was flawed. He asked the court to rule in Glossip's favor. Drummond's investigation found that Glossip's conviction relied heavily on Sneed's credibility. Since Sneed's testimony was the only direct evidence against Glossip, the jury's assessment of Sneed's credibility was crucial.

Sotomayor, a liberal justice, wrote the court's opinion. She agreed with Drummond, stating that prosecutors knew Sneed's statements were false. She also noted that correcting Sneed's testimony would have likely changed the jury's verdict. The court's decision means prosecutors must now decide whether to retry Glossip.

Despite Drummond's findings, an Oklahoma appeals court upheld the death sentence last year. The state's pardon and parole board also voted against granting Glossip clemency. The original prosecutors disputed Drummond's account, claiming they were not properly consulted during the investigation.

Two conservative justices, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, dissented. They argued that the Supreme Court lacks the power to override state court decisions just because the attorney general changed his position. Thomas wrote that the court "stretched the law" to rule in Glossip's favor. Another conservative justice, Amy Coney Barrett, agreed with most of Sotomayor's opinion but would have sent the case back to Oklahoma courts instead of throwing out the conviction.

The Supreme Court has a 6-3 conservative majority. They rarely step in to prevent executions. But they occasionally intervene when there's a clear miscarriage of justice. This case is a rare example of the court doing just that.

Unfair Trial: Supreme Court Sends Death Row Case Back to Oklahoma

Actions