▁cod ified ▁by ▁the ▁H abe as ▁Cor pus ▁Act ▁of ▁ 1 8 6 7 , ▁and ▁in ▁ 1 9 5 3 , ▁the ▁United ▁States ▁Supreme ▁Court ▁held ▁that ▁even ▁when ▁a ▁state ▁court ▁rules ▁against ▁a ▁prisoner , ▁that ▁individual ▁still ▁has ▁the ▁right ▁to ▁seek ▁de ▁nov o ▁review ▁of ▁their ▁constitution al ▁claims ▁in ▁federal ▁court . ▁However , ▁in ▁the ▁w ake ▁of ▁the ▁Oklahoma ▁City ▁bomb ing , ▁con gress ▁passed ▁the ▁Ant iter ror ism ▁and ▁Effect ive ▁Death ▁Pen alty ▁Act ▁(" A ED PA ") ▁in ▁ 1 9 9 6 ▁to ▁modify ▁federal ▁habe as ▁cor pus ▁procedures . ▁Under ▁the ▁A ED PA ' s ▁new ▁standards , ▁when ▁a ▁prisoner ' s ▁claim ▁has ▁been ▁adj ud ic ated ▁in ▁state ▁court , ▁that ▁individual ' s ▁pet ition ▁for ▁habe as ▁cor pus ▁shall ▁not ▁be ▁granted ▁unless ▁the ▁state ▁court ▁decision ▁" was ▁contrary ▁to , ▁or ▁involved ▁an ▁un reason able ▁application ▁of , ▁clearly ▁established ▁Federal ▁law , ▁as ▁determined ▁by ▁the ▁Supreme ▁Court ▁of ▁the ▁United ▁States ". ▁In ▁ 2 0 0 7 , ▁the ▁United ▁States ▁Supreme ▁Court ▁held ▁that , ▁as ▁a ▁" pre condition " ▁for ▁relief ▁under ▁the ▁A ED PA , ▁habe as ▁pet ition ers ▁must ▁demonstrate ▁evidence ▁that ▁a ▁state ▁court ' s ▁error ▁resulted ▁in ▁" actual ▁pre jud ice ". ▁ ▁Federal ▁har ml ess ▁error ▁doctrine ▁The ▁Supreme ▁Court ▁of ▁the ▁United ▁States