Rudy Giuliani talks to reporters before the Republican National Convention, on July 16, 2024, in Milwaukee (AP Photo/Paul Sancya).
Rudy Giuliani’s legal woes continue to worsen as a federal judge in Washington, D.C., threatened the embattled former New York City mayor with severe sanctions and possible “imprisonment” for allegedly repeating the same lies about the 2020 election that already resulted in a $148 million defamation judgment against him.
U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell on Monday ordered Giuliani to explain to the court why he should not be held in contempt of court for allegedly violating an order barring him from repeating the defamatory claims he made about Georgia election workers Ruby Freeman and her daughter Wandrea ArShaye “Shaye” Moss. Following Donald Trump’s loss in the 2020 presidential election, Giuliani repeatedly made false claims that the mother-daughter duo helped to rig the election in favor of Joe Biden.
After the defamation judgment, Giuliani consented to a permanent injunction prohibiting him from making any additional claims or statements indicating that Freeman or Moss had “engaged in wrong-doing in connection with the 2020 presidential election.”
Freeman and Moss on Nov. 20, 2024, filed a motion seeking to hold Giuliani in civil contempt, claiming his defamatory campaign against them continued even after they were awarded the astronomical judgment and Giuliani declared bankruptcy. According to the filing, the former U.S. Attorney for Manhattan had been “brazenly violating that consent injunction” by repeating “the exact same lies” that resulted in the initial defamation judgment against Giuliani.
Giuliani last week missed a Monday deadline to respond to the plaintiffs’ motion, instead filing a letter with the court on Wednesday asking for a 30-day extension to respond, claiming Howell’s bias had made it impossible for Giuliani to hire an attorney to represent him in the matter.
“I have spoken to four attorneys and each attorney has declined to handle this matter because they believe Your Honor is unreasonable and biased about [Donald] Trump-related matters and ‘ideological rather than logical,”” Giuliani wrote. “One said it was ‘a foregone conclusion’ and ‘a no-win proposition.’ Among other numerous reasons your handling of the J6 (Jan. 6) cases is considered by many to be the most unnecessarily harsh.”
Giuliani claimed that several attorneys agreed to represent him in his multiple other legal cases, “but not this one,” per the letter. He also said his struggle to find an attorney had been “exacerbated by the Thanksgiving holiday.”
Howell on Monday begrudgingly agreed to give Giuliani the extension, but her brief order does not appear to portend well for the former personal attorney to Donald Trump, as the judge made clear she would go so far as to order Giuliani’s imprisonment.
In the order, Howell pushed back an in-person hearing on the contempt motion to Jan. 10, 2025, stating that she did so in light of Giuliani’s claim “that he needs this time in order to ‘find an attorney,’” particularly in light of the “potential scope and severity” of the “arsenal of sanctions available to a court for civil contempt,” which include “compensatory and coercive fines, as well as imprisonment.’”
Howell also cautioned Giuliani against trying to provide the court with any more excuses for his failures to abide by court procedures, writing that “any further extension requests so he can obtain counsel will be viewed with continuing skepticism.”
Also on Monday, a federal judge in New York ordered Giuliani to attend an in-person hearing on additional contempt allegations after Freeman and Moss accused him of violating court orders and repeatedly flouting discovery obligations as they try to collect on the $148 million defamation judgment.
In the New York motion filed earlier this month, Freeman and Moss asked for a double whammy of sorts. Their memo says they want Giuliani punished with a contempt finding and concomitant contempt sanction — and separate sanctions related to discovery violations.
“Mr. Giuliani has not produced a single document in response to Plaintiffs’ discovery orders in this matter notwithstanding multiple orders from this Court requiring him to do so,” the memo reads.
