It is a long way down from being "America’s Mayor." Honestly, watching the legal spiral of Rudy Giuliani feels like witnessing a slow-motion car crash that just won't end. Recently, the headlines flared up again because Rudy Giuliani faces contempt hearing over $148 m defamation award, and if you’ve been following the saga of Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss, you know this isn’t just about money anymore. It’s about a total breakdown in the legal process.
Imagine being told you owe $148 million. Most people would probably spend every waking second trying to figure out how to navigate that. Giuliani? He’s been busy dodging discovery requests and making comments that land him right back in the crosshairs of federal judges.
Why the Contempt Hearing Happened
Basically, a contempt hearing isn't just a "slap on the wrist" meeting. It’s a judge saying, "I told you to do something, you didn't do it, and now I'm losing my patience." In early 2025, Judge Lewis Liman in Manhattan didn't hold back. He slammed Giuliani for what he called a "blithe disregard" for court orders.
The issue? Assets.
Lawyers for Freeman and Moss have been trying to collect on that massive judgment, but it’s been like pulling teeth. They wanted his luxury watches. They wanted his 1980 Mercedes-Benz. They even went after his World Series rings. Giuliani's team argued that some of these things were sentimental or that the requests were a "trap." Judge Liman wasn't buying it. He noted that Giuliani—a former prosecutor and disbarred attorney—should know better than anyone how discovery works.
The court was particularly annoyed by the "hide and seek" game regarding his Palm Beach condo. Giuliani claimed it was his primary residence to keep it shielded from the judgment. The plaintiffs' lawyers, however, pointed out that he seemed to be living in his New York apartment long after he said he’d moved.
🔗 Read more: Johnny Somali AI Deepfake: What Really Happened in South Korea
It's a mess.
The $148 Million Defamation Award Breakdown
To understand why Rudy Giuliani faces contempt hearing over $148 m defamation award, you have to look back at the original 2023 verdict. A jury in D.C. didn't just find him liable; they threw the book at him.
- $16 million to Ruby Freeman for defamation.
- $17 million to Shaye Moss for defamation.
- $40 million total for emotional distress.
- $75 million in punitive damages.
That $75 million punitive chunk is the real kicker. It was designed to punish the behavior, not just compensate the victims. The jury heard testimony about how these two women, who were just doing their jobs as election workers in Georgia, had their lives upended. They received racist threats. They were afraid to go to the grocery store. Giuliani’s claims that they were "quadruple counting" ballots were proven false time and again, yet the rhetoric continued.
A Second Judge Weighs In
Just when you thought it couldn't get more complicated, a second judge, Beryl Howell in D.C., found him in contempt too. She was furious because Giuliani allegedly kept making defamatory-style comments on his podcasts even after the injunction.
He didn't use their names directly. He tried to be "clever" by talking about "the video" and "ballot counting irregularities."
💡 You might also like: Sweden School Shooting 2025: What Really Happened at Campus Risbergska
Judge Howell called it "outrageous and shameful." She threatened $200 daily fines if he didn't certify he was following the orders. It’s rare to see one person fighting two different contempt battles in two different states over the same case, but here we are.
The January 2025 Settlement: A Turning Point?
By mid-January 2025, things took a sudden turn. Right as a trial was supposed to start to decide who owned the Florida condo and the rings, a settlement was announced.
Giuliani was scheduled to be the first witness. He didn't show up.
Instead, his lawyers and the plaintiffs reached a deal. Freeman and Moss released a statement saying they reached a "major milestone." Basically, Giuliani got to keep his homes and his personal belongings in exchange for "unspecified compensation" and—this is the big one—a promise to never defame them again.
By late February 2025, court filings indicated the judgment was "fully satisfied."
📖 Related: Will Palestine Ever Be Free: What Most People Get Wrong
It’s a bit of a head-scratcher. How do you satisfy $148 million with a settlement that lets you keep your houses? We don't know the exact dollar amount that changed hands, but the legal war over the assets finally cooled off.
What This Means for the Legal System
This case is a massive case study in "fai around and find out." It shows that while you can delay and deflect in court for a long time, the bill eventually comes due. Giuliani’s attempts to use bankruptcy to avoid the payment failed. His attempts to ignore discovery led to contempt.
If you're looking for the takeaway, it's that the legal system has very little patience for people who treat court orders as suggestions. Even if you were the mayor of the biggest city in the world.
Actionable Insights for Following the Aftermath
- Monitor the Arizona Case: Even though the defamation settlement is "satisfied," Giuliani still faces felony charges in Arizona related to the 2020 election. The legal "all-clear" is far from over.
- Watch the "No-Defamation" Clause: The settlement hinges on Giuliani staying quiet about Freeman and Moss. If he slips up on a podcast or social media, the whole thing could explode again.
- Audit Your Own Digital Footprint: While most of us aren't facing $148 million lawsuits, this case is a stark reminder that what you say online or on a broadcast has real-world legal weight. Defamation isn't a "free speech" loophole.
- Follow Asset Seizure Precedents: This case set a massive precedent for how "exempt" assets (like primary residences) are treated when a debtor is found to be acting in bad faith.
The saga of Rudy Giuliani faces contempt hearing over $148 m defamation award might be technically "satisfied" in the eyes of the court, but the reputational and financial damage is permanent. It’s a reminder that in the courtroom, facts eventually outlast the noise.