1. This case presents an important and recurring question concerning the legal standard for showing actual innocence sufficiently to overcome procedural default, which this Court established in Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298 (1995). Nearly thirty years since Schlup was decided, confusion remains in the circuit courts concerning the proper application of the actual innocence standard and the balancing of the entire evidentiary record in view of the newly discovered evidence. As evident from the two opinions issued by the Seventh Circuit in this case and by the split-panel result, courts often misunderstand that the actual innocence standard must be analyzed in the context of the constitutional requirement that a jury may not convict a criminal defendant unless it finds guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, a misunderstanding that stems from courts misreading Schlup to conclude that showing a likelihood that reasonable doubt would exist in the minds of reasonable jurors is insufficient to meet the actual innocence standard. See, e.g. Attachment 1 at 19-20, Attachment 3, at 19-20. Clarification by this Court is necessary to resolve this confusion.

Whether the actual innocence standard established in Schlup v. Delo requires courts to assess newly discovered evidence by asking whether reasonable jurors would likely have reasonable doubt regarding guilt, rather than applying a more stringent standard of proof