Giuliani suspended from New York bar
Court ruling cites the former mayor’s “false and misleading” statements on behalf of Trump about 2020 election.
A New York court has suspended then-President Donald Trump’s most prominent attorney, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, from the practice of law in that state over Giuliani’s claims of rampant fraud during the 2020 presidential election.
“We conclude that there is uncontroverted evidence that respondent communicated demonstrably false and misleading statements to courts, lawmakers and the public at large in his capacity as lawyer for former President Donald J. Trump and the Trump campaign in connection with Trump’s failed effort at reelection in 2020,” a five-judge New York Supreme Court appellate panel concluded in a per curiam opinion issued Thursday.
“These false statements were made to improperly bolster respondent’s narrative that due to widespread voter fraud, victory in the 2020 United States presidential election was stolen from his client. We conclude that respondent’s conduct immediately threatens the public interest and warrants interim suspension from the practice of law, pending further proceedings,” the judges added.
The court panel said an interim suspension, like the one it imposed on Giuliani, is an unusual remedy reserved for only the most serious cases of alleged misconduct.
The bar suspension is a stunning one for an attorney who once reached the pinnacles of the profession, serving as the No. 3 official at the Justice Department and becoming one of the country’s most prominent prosecutors as the U.S. Attorney in Manhattan in the 1980s.
Giuliani did not respond to messages seeking comment on the court’s action, but tweeted: “Are we living in Communist China? ...
Will the panel for the NY Bar Association be held accountable for abuse of power?”
A lawyer for Giuliani in an ongoing federal investigation into his work related to Ukraine, Robert Costello, expressed “surprise and disappointment” in the move but said he did not handle the matter and was not familiar with the details.
Former President Donald Trump called Giuliani a “great American patriot,” in a statement, adding: “All of New York is out of control, crime is at an all-time high—it’s nothing but a Witch Hunt, and they should be ashamed of themselves.”
The court order says Giuliani argued that taking action against him over his public advocacy would violate his First Amendment free speech rights. The court disagreed.
“We reject respondent’s argument. This disciplinary proceeding concerns the professional restrictions imposed on respondent as an attorney to not knowingly misrepresent facts and make false statements in connection with his representation of a client. It is long recognized that ‘speech by an attorney is subject to greater regulation than speech by others,’” the court said.
Giuliani will have the right to contest the charges at a formal hearing, but the court made clear it was not impressed by his initial submissions, calling some of his claims “simply untrue.”
According to the court ruling, Giuliani acknowledged that some of his claims were not accurate, but said he relied on information provided to him by others. The judges said Giuliani insisted that many of his assertions about dead voters and voting by undocumented immigrants were based on information he received from others, but he failed to provide the original information to the court and in some cases refused to say who provided it.
“We do not understand, nor does respondent explain why, as a private attorney seemingly unconnected to law enforcement he would have access to a ‘confidential informant’ that we cannot also have access to,” the court wrote. “At yet another point respondent claims he relies on a Trump attorney who chooses not to be identified ... Respondent also refers to hundreds of witnesses, experts, and investigative reports, none of which have been provided or identified.”
Much of the court’s ruling relies on Giuliani’s conduct at a November 17, 2020 court hearing in Williamsport, Pa., on a suit the Trump campaign filed challenging the outcome of the presidential election in that state. The judges said Giuliani repeatedly told the court that the campaign was advancing fraud claims in the case, when that claim had been withdrawn.
“Respondent’s mischaracterization of the case was not simply a passing mistake or inadvertent reference. Fraud was the crown of his personal argument before the court that day,” the court wrote. “It is indisputable that respondent had to be aware that there were no fraud claims in the case. Significant time and effort were expended on respondent’s false misrepresentations to the court regarding the nature of the proceedings.”