No. 25A937
Peyman Roshan v. George S. Cardona, in His Official Capacity as Chief Trial Counsel for the California State Bar, et al.
Tags: attorney-discipline facial-constitutional-challenge rooker-feldman-doctrine section-1983 supremacy-clause younger-abstention
Latest Conference:
N/A
Question Presented (from Petition)
Question not identified.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Younger abstention doctrine and Rooker-Feldman doctrine bar federal courts from exercising jurisdiction over 42 U.S.C. §1983 facial constitutional challenges to state attorney disciplinary rules and procedures when state proceedings have concluded or when federal constitutional law, as clarified in Williams v. Reed, renders state exhaustion requirements invalid under the Supremacy Clause
Docket Entries
2026-02-23
Application (25A937) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until May 16, 2026.
2026-02-11
Application (25A937) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from March 17, 2026 to May 16, 2026, submitted to Justice Kagan.
Attorneys
Peyman Roshan
Peyman Roshan — Petitioner