In a NYTimes OpEd Barr says:

THERE is no abuse of government power more egregious than executing an innocent man. But that is exactly what may happen if the United States Supreme Court fails to intervene on behalf of Troy Davis. …

I am a firm believer in the death penalty, but I am an equally firm believer in the rights and protections guaranteed by the Constitution. To execute Troy Davis without having a court hear the evidence of his innocence would be unconscionable and unconstitutional.

Just 10 days ago Bob Herbert had his second column in support of Troy:

It’s bad enough that we still execute people in the United States. It’s absolutely chilling that we’re willing to do it when we’re not even sure we’ve got the right person in our clutches.

SCOTUSblog details the new plea:

The filing does not ask the Supreme Court to rule directly at this point on Davis’ claim of innocence.  Rather, it asks the Justices to transfer the case to a federal District Court with an order that it hold an evidentiary hearing.

The Court’s rules indicate that such an original plea will not be heard unless, among other things, the individual involved shows that no other court could provide a remedy.  Because he has been barred by the Eleventh Circuit from pursuing a new habeas plea in lower courts, his “last hope for an evidentiary hearing to prove his innocence lies with this Court.”

LATER: Scott Greenfield takes Barr down a peg, disputing Barr’s claim that “nothing in the statute” Barr sponsored “should have left the courts with the impression that they were barred from hearing claims of actual innocence like Troy Davis’s:”

A bit disingenuous in light of the fact that your law left out any mention of allowing defendants who are “actually innocent” from coming back when his evidence or counsel improves.