Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Share The Supreme Court Hears Glossip v. Oklahoma
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Or
The Supreme Court Hears Glossip v. Oklahoma
Last week, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Glossip v. Oklahoma, a case challenging the constitutionality of Richard Glossip’s conviction and sentencing to death for a 1997 murder. In this episode, Paul Cassell of the University of Utah and Andrea Miller of the Oklahoma Innocence Project join Jeffrey Rosen to recap the oral arguments and debate whether or not Glossip’s conviction should stand in light of newly revealed documents that allegedly suggest prosecutorial misconduct.
Resources:
Glossip v. Oklahoma, Supreme Court oral argument (audio via C-SPAN; transcript)
Brief of Amicus Curiae the Innocence Project in Support of Petitioner Richard Eugene Glossip, Glossip v. Oklahoma
Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate.
Donate
View all episodes
By National Constitution CenterLast week, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Glossip v. Oklahoma, a case challenging the constitutionality of Richard Glossip’s conviction and sentencing to death for a 1997 murder. In this episode, Paul Cassell of the University of Utah and Andrea Miller of the Oklahoma Innocence Project join Jeffrey Rosen to recap the oral arguments and debate whether or not Glossip’s conviction should stand in light of newly revealed documents that allegedly suggest prosecutorial misconduct.
Resources:
Glossip v. Oklahoma, Supreme Court oral argument (audio via C-SPAN; transcript)
Brief of Amicus Curiae the Innocence Project in Support of Petitioner Richard Eugene Glossip, Glossip v. Oklahoma
Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate.
Donate