Skip to main content

Emergency application

Geronimo Velasco v. United States District Court for the Northern District of California

Denied
No. 25A217Stay applicationFiled by a private partyPresented to Justice KaganFrom United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

What did the Court do?

The Court denied the request on August 25, 2025: the lower court's ruling stays in effect while the appeal continues.

Emergency rulings are temporary and do not decide the underlying case.

Filed Ruled 27 days after filing

What's being asked

Geronimo Velasco asks the Supreme Court to temporarily pause a ruling by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The record does not describe that ruling or what the underlying dispute is about.

What the Court did

Justice Kagan refused the emergency help and denied (turned down) Velasco's request for a temporary pause. The order addresses only that request, not who ultimately wins the underlying case; the Court did not publish how the justices voted.

Vote not published · 9the order does not say how they voted
  1. Roberts
  2. Thomas
  3. Alito
  4. Sotomayor
  5. Kagan
  6. Gorsuch
  7. Kavanaugh
  8. Barrett
  9. Jackson
The order does not say how any justice voted, as is usual on the emergency docket.
Half of 302 rulings on applications decided without a response came 8 to 28 days after filing, and the median was 14 days; this one was ruled on 27 days after filing.

What it means

This emergency ruling addresses only whether to pause the Ninth Circuit's ruling; it does not decide who wins the underlying case. The Ninth Circuit ruling remains in effect, so the case can continue in the lower courts. The record lists no related case about the main question and no argument date.

Sources

Facts on this page come from the Supreme Court docket, orders, and opinions for No. 25A217. The answers restate that record in plain words; explainer copy is written from the record and the filings only.

Checked October 4, 2026