The Pennsylvania attorney claiming that new disciplinary rules aimed at curbing bias in the profession infringe on his free speech rights does not have standing to pursue those claims, a federal appeals court has ruled, dismissing a constitutional challenge to the controversial proposal.

The decision clears the way for the state Disciplinary Board to now begin enforcing the new rules, which seek to prohibit harassment and discrimination in the practice of law.

On Tuesday, a unanimous, three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled in Greenberg v. Lehocky that attorney Zachary Greenberg's pre-enforcement challenge to the proposed rules was too speculative to allow the lawsuit to proceed. The decision reverses a district court ruling, which had found the proposed rule to be unconstitutional.