A federal judge in Washington, D.C., found Rudy Giuliani in contempt of court Friday, saying that he violated a court order not to defame two former Georgia election workers, Ruby Freeman and her daughter, Shaye Moss.
In 2023, a jury awarded Freeman and Moss $148 million in a judgment against Giuliani for falsely claiming the pair engaged in a fake ballot processing scheme in Fulton County, Georgia, during the 2020 election. District Judge Beryl Howell determined Giuliani was liable for defaming the two after they became focal points of his unfounded claims.
Late last year, the women alleged Giuliani continued to defame them, claiming he had said on two broadcast shows that video showed them “quadruple counting” ballots and passing hard drives meant to “fix” voting machines. Court papers quote Giuliani saying in a Nov. 12, 2024 broadcast, “I’m sorry they’re going to sue me again for saying it, but what am I going to do but tell the truth?”
“These statements repeat the exact same lies for which Mr. Giuliani has already been held liable, and which he agreed to be bound by court order to stop repeating,” attorneys for the women wrote in court filings.
Related Post
At the outset of Friday’s hearing, Judge Howell told Giuliani, “You’re the most famous person in this courtroom right now. You’ve got a bigger audience. You’ve got a bigger public following than anybody in this courtroom. You have a respected public service history with that background.”
“I had hoped that what you heard, sworn to under oath in this courtroom, would make you realize that what you were saying about the plaintiffs just wasn’t true, and that you’d stop saying those things,” she continued.
Giuliani protested, “No, I did not,” when she said he’d sworn to not say anything to defame Freeman and Moss.
Freeman and Moss’ attorney, Michael Gottlieb, said of Giuliani’s comment claiming the two passed hard drives to each other that “this is a specific reference, referenced multiple times in the appendix to the injunction about his allegation, which is a false allegation that our clients were passing a hard drive in order to influence the machines.”
Gottlieb argued that it was clear Giuliani was talking about Freeman and Moss with the comment that the two were seen “quadruple counting ballots,” because there’s only one video from the 2020 election in Georgia that Giuliani has ever alleged involved multiple counting of ballots, the video from the State Farm Arena, in Atlanta. This, he said, was “a crystal clear reference” to Freeman and Moss.
Judge Howell pressed Gottlieb on how anyone would know Giuliani was specifically referring to Freeman and Moss, since he never referred to them by name. But Gottlieb responded that the average person should not be the standard applied in this case.
“The injunction was specifically written to avoid a situation where [Giuliani] might not use their names, but instead might talk obliquely in order to convey the same defamatory meaning, the same implications about the plaintiffs, without using their names directly,” Gottlieb said.
Giuliani’s attorney, Eden Quainton, claimed Giuliani’s legal team had not been told of the examples of defamation after the trial and claimed the allegations were not clear.
“When you look at the text of those videos, the fact that he had to bring in another video that wasn’t previously brought to our attention as proof of what the November 12 said, that really undermines the idea that he had clear and convincing evidence to start with,” Quainton said.
Judge Howell stopped Quainton several times and at one point told him, “This is really a waste of time.”
Freeman and Moss are seeking a $20,000 monetary compensation for each future violation of the consent judgement, paid to the court using Giuliani’s exempt assets, such as his IRA account and Florida condominium. They’re asking for an order specifying that Giuliani use any assets he claims as assets, some of which are currently being litigated in New York. Howell indicated she planned to rule on a motion Friday.
Since the defamation trial, Giuliani has appeared in several separate court proceedings about his ability to pay the fine.
On Monday, a federal judge in Manhattan held him in contempt for failing to turn over information about his assets to contribute to paying off the $148 million he owes. Court papers say he has handed over some possessions, including a car, but the court said he failed to give them access to his other assets and information. The litigation over his finances continues.
Ahead of Friday’s hearing in Washington, D.C., Giuliani had asked to appear virtually, citing health problems and safety concerns. He ultimately withdrew that request after the judge appeared skeptical of his claims.
Giuliani and his defense team pushed back on the latest claims, alleging Freeman and Moss failed to “present clear and convincing evidence of a violation,” adding they did not consider “Giuliani’s substantial compliance with the consent judgment since its entry.”
His attorneys argued the alleged violations did not meet the standard of contempt and his statements had been unclear and lacked context.
“Giuliani has scrupulously avoided mentioning the names of the Plaintiffs and has, as noted, referenced the Georgia ballot counting irregularities in connection with his other legal issues, including a pending indictment in Arizona,” they wrote.
Freeman and Moss disputed these claims. Their attorneys urged the court to put Giuliani “on notice that he will face fines for any similar conduct that occurs in the future.”
Throughout the days-long trial that resulted in the $148 million ruling, jurors heard directly from Freeman and Moss, who described the terror they felt after they were thrust into the public eye after the 2020 election. The mother and daughter both said their lives had been changed when they were publicly identified, and a barrage of racist threats followed.
An investigation by the Georgia secretary of state later concluded that “[a]ll allegations made against Freeman and Moss were unsubstantiated and found to have no merit.”
Giuliani has consistently denied wrongdoing in the case and alleged the proceedings against him have been politically motivated.
