Rudy Giuliani has been disbarred in New York following a decision by the state’s appellate court. The ruling, announced Thursday, cited Giuliani’s false and misleading statements regarding the 2020 presidential election as the primary reason for the disbarment.
The disbarment of Rudy Giuliani comes days after the SCOTUS immunity ruling and shows the extent to which Democrats intend to prosecute Republicans associated with the now-presidential candidate, Donald Trump.
Giuliani, who served as personal attorney to former President Donald Trump, was found to have made numerous false claims about widespread voter fraud.
In their decision, the court stated, “The disciplinary charges stem from the allegations 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. 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.”
In June 2021, the court suspended Giuliani’s license, citing “uncontroverted evidence that he communicated demonstrably false and misleading statements to courts, lawmakers, and the public at large, which conduct immediately threatened the public interest.”
In August 2023, the court appointed a Referee to conduct a hearing on the charges. The Referee was tasked with filing a report that included findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations for appropriate discipline. This appointment followed the Attorney Grievance Committee (AGC), serving Giuliani with a petition of 20 charges based on the misconduct that led to his interim suspension.
The Referee found “that the AGC had proven 16 charges” at the end of a six-day liability hearing in the fall of 2023.
Initially, the AGC functioned under the assumption that Giuliani made statements in “good faith” and “believed the allegations he made to support his claim that the 2020 Presidential election was stolen from [Trump].”
It was later concluded that “The Referee rejected the lack of knowledge-good faith defense, explicitly finding that, regarding the proven charges, he had made ‘knowing falsehoods’ and that each falsehood was made ‘with the intent to deceive.’”
