The U.S. Supreme Court is reviewing the case of Richard Glossip, an Oklahoma death row inmate convicted of a 1997 murder-for-hire scheme, whose conviction has been contested due to alleged prosecutorial misconduct and withheld evidence. Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, along with bipartisan support, believes Glossip did not receive a fair trial, citing that key evidence was not disclosed and false testimony was permitted from key witness Justin Sneed, who confessed to the murder. The Supreme Court justices are divided on whether to grant Glossip a new trial, with some proposing to remand the case for an evidentiary hearing. This unusual case, where both the state and the defense agree on the need for a retrial, highlights broader concerns about the reliability of the death penalty system. The decision could potentially set a precedent regarding how convictions are handled when state errors are acknowledged. The outcome is pending, with a decision expected by early next year.