Rudy Giuliani, the man once known as the crimebusting U.S. attorney and America’s mayor, but who has long since forfeited any title worthy of respect, has been found in contempt of court for failing to comply with a judgment to make good on a $148 million libel settlement against two Georgia election workers Rudy smeared. He said they tampered with election results, lies that — along with a raft of others — cost him his New York law license.
When you lose a defamation case, you have to pay up. Fellow lying Trump ally Alex Jones, who owes $1.5 billion to Newtown families for saying they falsified their children’s murders, could share his notes with Rudy, as could Donald Trump himself, who owes $88.3 million for defaming E. Jean Carroll.
But, surprise surprise, someone with as little tolerance for other people’s failings as Giuliani wants to be cut endless slack himself. Giuliani, says Manhattan Federal Judge Lewis Liman, “willfully violated a clear and unambiguous order” when he “blew past” a Dec. 20 deadline to turn over evidence that would help Liman decide whether Hizdisonner can keep his Palm Beach condo as his residence or must turn it over because it’s determined to be a vacation home.
Moreover, Rudy failed to provide a complete list of doctors and other professional services providers, facts the court needed to determine whether they are in fact in Florida — information essential to determine how he satisfies the judgment.
Liman says Giuliani has only produced a small set of “cherry-picked” documents — the equivalent of being told to do your homework by the teacher and handing in some scrawl on a Post-It note.
When Donald Trump was president the first time he said, “You can’t say things that are false, knowingly false, and be able to smile as money pours into your bank account” and he promised (and failed) to “open up libel laws” to punish those who illegally smear public officials.
The libel laws that Trump complains about are those that, well settled by Supreme Court precedent, create a substantially higher bar when an individual is charged with lying about a public figure. The distinction has served the Republic well, fostering open and lively conversation about powerful people even if it makes it hard to prosecute someone for saying, for example, that Democratic politicians are orchestrating a vast child exploitation network.
Under New York Times vs. Sullivan, speech about people who are already in the public eye is only deemed defamatory if it can be established that the speaker acted with “actual malice” or “reckless disregard” of the truth. When the smeared individual is just an ordinary American, the standard is much lower — mere negligence.
The Georgia election workers were private, not public, figures. Still, Giuliani acted with at least reckless disregard for the truth if not actual malice as he lied. Nevertheless, he refuses to comply with a judge’s orders.
Sounds like someone might need to open up the libel laws in the exact opposite direction of what Trump has urged: to make sure famous folks like Giuliani pay a price after they drag through the mud the names of regular Joes and Janes.
