Rudy Giuliani

[bob]

Mike D.'s explainer:

[Fortinbras]

This is just the start of the mudslide. Expect other states where Rudy was licensed to impose reciprocal discipline automatically.

[KickahaOta]

While I have no problem with the court suspending his license for lying to court, I think the court is overreaching a bit with lies told to others.

Giuliani has a duty of candor with the courts. But disciplining lawyers for false statements generally would catch more than just Giuliani.

The NY ethics rules do have very broad no-lying provisions. And Giuliani's primary defense was the First Amendment, which the court rejected. So I'm not saying the court is wrong; just that this broadness is going to invite criticism.

The five judges on the panel were undoubtedly keenly aware of that. And yet they voted 5-0, not just to suspend Giuliani, but to do so on an interim basis, without first holding a suspension hearing. What do you suppose that says about the strength of the evidence?

[slq]

While I have no problem with the court suspending his license for lying to court, I think the court is overreaching a bit with lies told to others.

Giuliani has a duty of candor with the courts. But disciplining lawyers for false statements generally would catch more than just Giuliani.

The NY ethics rules do have very broad no-lying provisions. And Giuliani's primary defense was the First Amendment, which the court rejected. So I'm not saying the court is wrong; just that this broadness is going to invite criticism.

I agree that, in general, it is a stretch to suspend an attorney for lying to the public. But this lie " immediately threatens the public interest and warrants interim suspension from the practice of law."

[johnpcapitalist]

Best quote, buried way down on Page 27:

...the uncontroverted misconduct in itself will likely result in substantial permanent sanctions at the conclusion of these disciplinary proceedings.

Guess they already know how the story ends. Sayonara, Roodles.

[chancery]

While I have no problem with the court suspending his license for lying to court, I think the court is overreaching a bit with lies told to others.

Giuliani has a duty of candor with the courts. But disciplining lawyers for false statements generally would catch more than just Giuliani.

The NY ethics rules do have very broad no-lying provisions. And Giuliani's primary defense was the First Amendment, which the court rejected. So I'm not saying the court is wrong; just that this broadness is going to invite criticism.

What Bob said. OTOH, there's this in footnote 4 of the decision:

In opposition to this motion, respondent refers to affidavits he has not provided (Giuliani affidavit ¶¶11, 50, 61, 62, 66). He also relies on a “confidential informant” (Giuliani affidavit ¶82). 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. At yet another point respondent claims he relies on a Trump attorney who chooses not to be identified (Giuliani affidavit ¶43). Respondent also refers to hundreds of witnesses, experts, and investigative reports, none of which have been provided or identified (Giuliani affidavit ¶14) and an Excel spreadsheet, also not provided, purportedly listing the names of thousands of deceased voters who allegedly cast ballots in Michigan (Giuliani affidavit ¶51)

I can't offhand think of a better way to persuade a court that you're full of baloney.

[bob]

I agree that, in general, it is a stretch to suspend an attorney for lying to the public. But this lie " immediately threatens the public interest and warrants interim suspension from the practice of law."

No doubt. But suspension for lying to the public is going to run into some non-frivolous First Amendment arguments.

So, again, what is surprising is that the court didn't just stick to the lying-to-courts charge to justify the interim suspension.

[much ado]

Yes friends, a manure spreader in action...

[RTH10260]

My pick from Mike Dunford:

https:// twitter.com/questauthority/status/1408113332394024963

Mike Dunford @questauthority

My read of this is that it's not only an interim suspension, it's an interim suspension because there is uncontroverted evidence of misconduct, and there has NOT been a hearing yet??

WOW.

► Show Spoiler

[zekeb]

IMO any licensed lawyer who lies to the public while promoting himself as an attorney, therefore implying that he knows what he's talking about, deserves a suspension.

[chancery]

Mike's take on Footnote 4, about the confidential source the numerous affidavits that Giuliani relies on but refused to share with the court, and the "hundreds of witnesses, experts, andinvestigative reports, none of which have been provided or identified."

Oh, Rudy. No. Oh no. No. No. No. No. What WERE YOU THINKING???

You're trying to rely on things YOU DID NOT GIVE THEM?? AND A "CONFIDENTIAL INFORMANT"???

No.

[filly]

My pick from Mike Dunford:

https:// twitter.com/questauthority/status/1408113332394024963

Mike Dunford @questauthority

My read of this is that it's not only an interim suspension, it's an interim suspension because there is uncontroverted evidence of misconduct, and there has NOT been a hearing yet??

WOW.

► Show Spoiler

I Could be wrong but I read that as a hearing by the court, not the State Bar Grievance Committee.

[bob]

And Mike D.'s explainer on his explainer (i.e., the policy concerns):

[somerset]

And Mike D.'s explainer on his explainer (i.e., the policy concerns):

The whole thread is worth reading. Personally, I agree with MikeD. But I'm biased against Roodles

[LM K]

IMO any licensed lawyer who lies to the public while promoting himself as an attorney, therefore implying that he knows what he's talking about, deserves a suspension.

Agreed. He lied to the public in his capacity as a lawyer while claiming to represent the public's needs for a "secure election".

[LM K]

The whole thread is worth reading. Personally, I agree with MikeD. But I'm biased against Roodles

[Tiredretiredlawyer]

Well, dig into it in a second anyway. I want to make sure I convey how unusual this is.

Generally, to get suspended on an interim basis, you have to do something along the lines of taking a literal crap, while high on a mixed cocktail of illicit substances, on the judge's desk.

-Dunford tweet

[Uninformed]

[tek]

Parker says My Pillow doesn't tell Lindell what to say/do. Nichols asks if My Pillow has ever told Lindell to stop mentioning the company when he's talking about the election. Parker says the company has never tried to muzzle Lindell.

[SuzieC]

I think that's exactly the point.

So did Dershowitz have any contribution to the proceedings?

[bob]

So did Dershowitz have any contribution to the proceedings?

The hearing isn't over yet, but none so far.

(Which isn't surprising.)

[tek]

With any luck, he kept his underwear on.

[woodworker]

So did Dershowitz have any contribution to the proceedings?

The hearing isn't over yet, but none so far.

(Which isn't surprising.)

Is there a live twitter feed on this. PLEEEEZE.

[bob]

Is there a live twitter feed on this. PLEEEEZE.

There is:

[neeneko]

You can really hear their grifter roots in their arguments. Fraudsters and sleazy marketers must be salivating at their 'you should be able to say anything about anyone and let the people decide if it is true' ideas.