Emergency application
Lawyer discipline and federal law
Peyman Roshan v. Melanie Lawrence
What did the Court do?
The Court denied the request on June 29, 2026: the lower court's ruling stays in effect while the appeal continues.
Emergency rulings are temporary and do not decide the underlying case.
What's being asked
Peyman Roshan asks the Supreme Court to temporarily stop the Ninth Circuit from issuing its mandate while he prepares a petition asking the Supreme Court to review his case. He argues California's system for disciplining lawyers conflicts with federal law and the Constitution. The excerpts do not explain the specific dispute behind his challenge.
What the Court did
The Court refused the emergency request (denied the application), so it did not order the requested pause of the Ninth Circuit's mandate. The order does not decide who wins the underlying dispute. The Court did not publish how the justices voted.
What it means
The denial concerns only temporary emergency relief and does not decide who wins the underlying dispute; the case can continue in the Ninth Circuit. The docket lists no related Supreme Court case on the main question, and no argument date is set.
Sources
Facts on this page come from the Supreme Court docket, orders, and opinions for No. 25A1317. The answers restate that record in plain words; explainer copy is written from the record and the filings only.