PHILADELPHIA — The Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Friday unanimously rejected Attorney General Kathleen Kane’s request that it reverse its suspension of her law license.

Last month, the embattled attorney general asked the court to undo the suspension, saying its 5-0 decision in September was “incurably tainted” by the participation of Justice J. Michael Eakin, who is now facing misconduct charges because of his involvement in the so-called Porngate scandal.

The high court avoided addressing that issue. Instead, it rejected Kane’s appeal on technical grounds, saying she had filed it too late.

Kane’s “claims of bias are untimely and are not properly before this Court for consideration,” the court said in its order.

Eakin, suspended from the court while awaiting his trial on ethics charges, did not take part in the ruling.

Kane has argued that Eakin faced a conflict in voting last year because he knew that Kane had proof that he had exchanged offensive emails. His vote was a “deliberate attempt to remove his accuser” and prevent “further exposure” of his troubling emails, she said.

The high court rejected that argument and affirmed its decision to suspend Kane’s license to practice law as she awaits trial on criminal charges.

Kane, 49, is charged with perjury, obstruction and other crimes for allegedly leaking secret grand jury information and later lying about it under oath. She has pleaded not guilty.

Friday’s decision clears the way for the state Senate to vote whether to remove Kane, a Democrat, from office.

In a vote that split last month along partisan lines, Republicans on a special committee in the GOP-controlled chamber recommended that the full Senate vote on a measure to oust Kane if the Supreme Court reaffirmed the license suspension.

The state ethics board for lawyers successfully urged the high court to suspend Kane’s law license after she was criminally charged.

Prosecutors in Montgomery County have accused the attorney general of illegally leaking confidential documents to a newspaper in a bid to embarrass a critic and then lying about her actions under oath. Kane has acknowledged providing information to the paper but said she did it in a lawful way.

Citing Kane’s admission, the ethics board told the Supreme Court that the leak amounted to “egregious misconduct” that “undermined all the safeguards embodied in the investigative grand jury process.” Kane, it wrote, “is facing criminal charges for the same statutes she is responsible for prosecuting.”