Overview

• The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 to send Brenda Andrew's case back to a lower court, citing concerns over prejudicial evidence used during her trial.
• Prosecutors focused on Andrew's sexual history, clothing, and personal life, which her defense argued unfairly influenced the jury and violated her due process rights.
• Andrew was convicted of conspiring with her boyfriend, James Pavatt, to murder her estranged husband, Rob Andrew, in 2001 for life insurance benefits.
• The Court's decision highlights the constitutional principle that evidence so unduly prejudicial it renders a trial fundamentally unfair violates the Fourteenth Amendment.
• Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch dissented, arguing that the evidence of Andrew's guilt was overwhelming and the trial was not fundamentally unfair.