Rudy Giuliani was found in contempt of court by a federal judge in Washington, D.C., on Friday for violating a court order not to defame two former Georgia election workers, Ruby Freeman and her daughter Shaye Moss.
According to D.C. District Judge Beryl Howell, Giuliani violated the consent judgment against him in “at least six ways.” She claimed that his statements “accuse plaintiffs of improper, illegal conduct in relation to the 2020 election,” in violation of the injunction.
“Mr. Giuliani engaged in the worst kind of defamation, wrongly accusing these two women, these plaintiffs, of engaging in serious election crimes,” Howell said, despite having agreed not to make such statements.
“It is outrageous and shameful that Mr. Giuliani dares to suggest that he is the one being treated unfairly when his conduct has caused the plaintiffs real harm, as he heard about at the trial,” the tribunal’s judge stated.
In 2023, a jury awarded Freeman and Moss $148 million in a judgment against Giuliani for falsely claiming the two were involved in a fake ballot processing scheme in Fulton County, Georgia, during the 2020 election. District Judge Beryl Howell found Giuliani liable for defaming the two after they became the focus of his baseless allegations.
Late last year, the women claimed Giuliani continued to defame them, claiming on two television shows that video showed them “quadruple counting” ballots and passing hard drives intended to “fix” voting machines. Court documents quote Giuliani as saying in a Nov. 12, 2024 broadcast, “I am sorry they are 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 for which he agreed to be bound by court order to stop repeating,” the women’s attorneys wrote in court filings.
At the start of Friday’s hearing, Judge Howell told Giuliani, “You are the most famous person in this courtroom right now. You have a larger audience. You have a larger public following than anyone in this courtroom. With that background, you have a respectable public service history.
“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 was not true, and that you would stop saying those things,” she said afterwards.
When she said he would sworn not to say anything to defame Freeman and Moss, Giuliani responded, “No, I didn’t.”
Michael Gottlieb, Freeman and Moss’ attorney, stated of Giuliani’s claim that the two passed hard drives to each other, “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 Giuliani was clearly referring to Freeman and Moss when he said the two were seen “quadruple counting ballots,” because there is only one video from the 2020 Georgia election that Giuliani has ever claimed involved multiple ballot counts, and it is from the State Farm Arena in Atlanta. He described it as “a crystal clear reference” to Freeman and Moss.
Judge Howell pressed Gottlieb on how anyone could know Giuliani was referring specifically to Freeman and Moss when he never mentioned them by name. However, Gottlieb responded that the average person should not be the standard 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 told reporters.
Eden Quainton, Giuliani’s attorney, claimed Giuliani’s legal team was not informed of the examples of defamation following the trial and that the allegations were unclear.
“When you look at the text of those videos, the fact that he had to bring in another video that was not 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,” according to Quainton.
Judge Howell stopped Quainton several times and told him, “This is really a waste of time.”
Freeman and Moss are seeking $20,000 in monetary compensation for each future violation of the consent judgment, which will be paid to the court from Giuliani’s exempt assets, including his IRA account and Florida condominium.
They are seeking an order requiring Giuliani to use any assets he claims to have, some of which are currently being litigated in New York. Howell indicated that she planned to rule on a motion on Friday.
Since the defamation trial, Giuliani has appeared in several separate court proceedings to address his ability to pay the fine.
On Monday, a federal judge in Manhattan found him in contempt for failing to turn over information about his assets to help pay off his $148 million debt. According to court documents, he has handed over some possessions, including a car, but has failed to provide them with access to his other assets and information. The legal battle over his finances continues.
Giuliani requested a virtual appearance before Friday’s hearing in Washington, D.C., citing health and safety concerns. He eventually withdrew the request after the judge appeared skeptical of his claims.
Giuliani and his defense team disputed the latest allegations, claiming Freeman and Moss failed to “present clear and convincing evidence of a violation,” and that they did not consider “Giuliani’s substantial compliance with the consent judgment since its entry.”
His attorneys contended that the alleged violations did not meet the standard of contempt, and that his statements were 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,” according to their letter.
Freeman and Moss denied these allegations. Their lawyers 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 verdict, jurors heard directly from Freeman and Moss, who described the terror they felt after being thrust into the spotlight following the 2020 election. The mother and daughter both stated that being publicly identified changed their lives, and they received a barrage of racist threats as a result.
The Georgia Secretary of State’s investigation 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, alleging that the proceedings against him are politically motivated.