More stories

  • in

    John Eastman, Former Trump Election Lawyer, Should Be Disbarred, Judge Finds

    The decision was only the latest effort by bar officials to seek accountability against a group of lawyers who sought to help President Donald J. Trump stay in office despite his election loss.A judge in California recommended on Wednesday that the lawyer John Eastman be stripped of his law license, finding he had violated rules of professional ethics by persistently lying in his efforts to help former President Donald J. Trump maintain his grip on power after losing the 2020 election.In a 128-page ruling, the judge, Yvette Roland, said Mr. Eastman had willfully misrepresented facts in lawsuits he helped file challenging the election results and acted dishonestly in promoting a “wild theory” that Mr. Trump’s vice president, Mike Pence, could unilaterally declare him the victor during a certification proceeding at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.“In sum, Eastman exhibited gross negligence by making false statements about the 2020 election without conducting any meaningful investigation or verification of the information he was relying upon,” Judge Roland found, adding that he had breached “his ethical duty as an attorney to prioritize honesty and integrity.”The ruling said Mr. Eastman would lose his license within three days of the decision being issued. While he can appeal the finding, the ruling makes his license “inactive,” meaning that he cannot practice law in California while a review is taking place.The decision was only the latest effort by bar officials across the country to seek accountability against a group of lawyers who pushed false claims of election fraud and sought to help Mr. Trump stay in office.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    On Donald Trump, E. Jean Carroll and the Limits of Libel Law

    In the days since a New York jury ordered Donald Trump to pay $83.3 million in damages to the libel plaintiff E. Jean Carroll, the question has been whether the dollar amount was high enough to put a stop to his lies.That we must ask this question tells us something important about the moment in which we find ourselves. And it tells us something important about both the value and the limits of libel law.Doubt about what will come next is well placed. As Ms. Carroll’s lawyers argued, Mr. Trump has bragged of wealth far exceeding this amount. He has publicly resolved to repeat the falsehood “a thousand times.” Indeed, he doubled down on his false claims about Ms. Carroll on social media and on the campaign trail even as the jury was hearing his case.But this “will he or won’t he?” speculation is only the latest data point in a larger, more alarming trend of libel damages simply not seeming to carry the deterrent effect that defamation law presupposes they will have. We have entered an era in which the incentives to serve up lies for politics or profit are so strong that libel damage awards and settlements may not meaningfully change behaviors.Several examples show a stark break from the past. For most of the long history of libel law, a jury determination that material was false and defamatory settled the question, and defendants facing that liability would take every possible step not to repeat the lie — both because it would be socially reprehensible to do so and because the risk of punitive damages was a powerful deterrent unlikely to be overcome by any stronger incentive. In short, libel law used to stop the libel.But recent cases have revealed some defendants who seem motivated to defame even as their assets are depleted or made unreachable to plaintiffs. Rudy Giuliani, who reasserted his defamatory allegations against two Georgia poll workers outside the courthouse as the jury decided his case, filed for bankruptcy just days after he was ordered to pay $148 million for those lies. Alex Jones did the same less than two months after a jury ordered him and his Infowars parent company to pay close to $1 billion for years of lies about the Sandy Hook families. He had used his broadcasts to rail against the suits throughout the proceedings and to seek audience donations to fund them.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber?  More

  • in

    How Hillsdale Got Mixed Up in the 2020 Election Plot

    A few days before Thanksgiving 2020, a half-dozen or so people gathered at the home of a Michigan lawyer named Robert E. Norton II.Listen to This ArticleOpen this article in the New York Times Audio app on iOS.Norton is the general counsel of Hillsdale College, a small, conservative Christian school in the southern part of the state. One of his guests was Ian Northon, a Hillsdale alumnus and private lawyer who did work for the college. Also in attendance were a couple of state lawmakers, Beth Griffin and Julie Alexander, who represented conservative districts north of Detroit.Northon would later describe the meeting to the congressional committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, storming of the U.S. Capitol. “Somebody at Hillsdale reached out to me, said they are going to have this little meeting,” he testified. “I went to it. There were a handful of reps there, and then Giuliani called in.” That, of course, was Rudolph W. Giuliani, the former New York City mayor turned personal lawyer to President Donald J. Trump.“We don’t think that the laws have been followed, but we don’t know,” Northon recalled Giuliani saying over the speakerphone, then instructing the group to let the campaign know about any signs of election fraud they discovered. “He was not on the call for very long, and I don’t know if he knew that he was speaking to a group of legislators and lawyers in Michigan,” Northon said. “I got the sense that he was making a lot of calls around that time.”Trump’s campaign to remain in power was already in full, if flailing, swing. Just hours after the final polls closed on election night, in a televised speech from the White House, the president declared the election “a fraud on the American public”; he and his allies proceeded to spread the lie of a rigged election on Fox News, on conservative talk radio and on Twitter. Giuliani had held his infamously unhinged news conference at Four Seasons Total Landscaping in Philadelphia, where he floated the idea that “ballots have been manufactured in advance” by Democrats. At a contentious Oval Office meeting several days later, Trump sidelined the campaign lawyers and instead made Giuliani the point man for the rush of ultimately futile lawsuits challenging the election. The key swing states had yet to certify the vote; for Trump and his allies, Michigan became a focus. On Nov. 17, according to The Detroit News, the president called two members of the Board of Canvassers of heavily Democratic Wayne County and pressed them not to certify. Three days later, he brought a delegation of the state’s Republican legislative leaders to the White House to hear out his fraud claims. It is unclear precisely how the Hillsdale contingent was brought into this widening conspiracy-seeking swirl. But the college was nothing if not well connected. Northon also did work for the Amistad Project, a self-described “election-integrity watchdog” that emerged as a primary partner in the Trump campaign’s election-fraud litigation. Before Norton came to Hillsdale, he was a vice president of the Bradley Foundation, a Milwaukee-based conservative philanthropy that has funded groups advancing voter-fraud conspiracy theories. And most prominent was Hillsdale’s president, Larry P. Arnn. Over two decades, Arnn had fashioned the college as an avatar of resistance to progressivism, all the while amassing relationships with many of the influencers and financiers who were transforming conservative politics in America. By the time Trump swept into the White House in 2017, Arnn had made Hillsdale an academic darling and supplier of philosophical gravitas to the new right. So prominent was Arnn that he was mentioned as a possible education secretary before losing out to Betsy DeVos, part of a wealthy Michigan family of major conservative donors and Hillsdale patrons. (Her brother, the private-security contractor Erik Prince, is an alumnus.) Hillsdale graduates became aides in the Trump administration and on Capitol Hill and clerks at the Supreme Court. (“We have hired many staff from Hillsdale,” says Marc Short, who served as chief of staff to Trump’s vice president and Arnn’s longtime friend, Mike Pence.) In the Covid years, the backlash against school closures, mask mandates and diversity programs made education perhaps the most important culture-wars battleground. Hillsdale was at the center, and nowhere more than in Florida, where Gov. Ron DeSantis frequently invoked Hillsdale as he sought to cleanse the state’s schools of liberal influence. “How many places other than Hillsdale are actually standing for truth?” he said at a 2022 Hillsdale-sponsored event in Naples, Fla. The 2020 election was not particularly close in Michigan — Joseph R. Biden Jr. carried the state by more than 150,000 votes. But the pre-Thanksgiving gathering at Norton’s house presaged broader efforts to thwart the will of Michigan voters, as well as the entanglement of Hillsdale’s administration in the events leading up to Jan. 6. Norton and Northon would become involved in a plan to deploy fake Trump electors in Michigan, as was done in other battleground states. Arnn would counsel Pence, as the vice president faced mounting pressure to block certification of the vote in the House of Representatives. Mike Pence after giving a lecture at Christ Chapel on the campus of Hillsdale College last March. He has called the college’s president, Larry Arnn, a mentor.David Guralnick/The Detroit News, via Associated PressLast July, the Michigan attorney general, Dana Nessel, a Democrat, brought felony charges against all 16 of the state’s bogus Trump electors; she has said that her investigation remains open, raising questions about whether more charges might be coming. And while the Michigan indictments were the first stemming from the Trump campaign’s effort to seize electoral votes, at least four other swing states are now pursuing criminal investigations. Hillsdale administrators declined to be interviewed for this article. But in response to written questions, the college said its officials had acted and spoken in a “personal capacity” regarding the 2020 election. Hillsdale also disputed aspects of testimony to the House Jan. 6 committee, saying among other things that Norton’s call with Giuliani and his meeting with legislators took place separately. “The scope of Mr. Norton’s efforts has been vastly overstated,” the college said, adding that the general counsel’s goal “was to establish clarity and truth, and not a pre-established election outcome.”Hillsdale’s part in the election story, while hardly a secret, has received little notice beyond the local press. Viewed in the context of the vast and tentacled campaign to overturn the election, it falls somewhere between sideshow and main event. Consider it a reflection of an angry, untethered era in which unlikely actors have come to have an outsize imprint on our politics. Last spring, seeking a fuller picture of the college and its role in the tumult, I planned a trip to Hillsdale. I was told I couldn’t visit campus and reminded, after I asked to interview Arnn and others, that Hillsdale was a private college — though I was eventually granted a tour after students had left for the summer. Even so, interviews with scores of people — students, alumni, current and former faculty and staff members, donors, Republican operatives and politicians, former White House officials and lawyers connected to the state elections case — offered some answers to the overarching question: How did a small college in Michigan, self-defined by the idea that the project of American democracy is the realization of millenniums of Western wisdom, get mixed up in a plot to subvert it? Larry Arnn often talks about Hillsdale as a last redoubt of the classical liberal arts, guided by a reverence for the highest, most enduring ideas. Students are required to complete a core curriculum rooted in the great books and Western tradition. Much of what is taught at Hillsdale, Arnn has said, “was written before there was a United States of America, much less a modern conservative movement.” There’s something assertively old-fashioned about the place. Alumni refer to a “Hillsdale bubble”: Dorms are single-sex and the college affords parents a degree of access to their children’s grades and instructors more commonly found in high school. Hillsdale students tend to be high academic achievers; not all are particularly political. “For the most part, students are pretty focused on their studies,” says Caleb Greene, a senior. “They’re less concerned with all the other current events that are in the news right now.” Today, many leading universities find themselves in crisis debating the limits of allowable speech, on both the left and the right. Hillsdale, many alumni say, remains largely unmuddled by ideological diversity. In a 2016 essay in the college paper, one student ventured a modest proposal: “While conservatives condemn policies that restrict the marketplace of ideas in other schools, our own school may be guilty of a similar offense,” she wrote. “It’s time Hillsdale invited a progressive to campus.”Yet if Hillsdale can seem to exist in a time before the modern culture wars, Arnn is quick to frame his college as the heroic opposition. “Most liberal colleges and universities today deny that such a thing as ‘truth’ exists and instead encourage young people to find what is true for themselves, carrying their politically correct ‘safe spaces’ wherever they go,” he said in an email to a college mailing list last year. Under Arnn’s stewardship — on Facebook, one alumnus referred to the college as “Arnn Arbor” — Hillsdale has become as much a political and ideological campaign as it is a pedagogical home for its 1,600 students. Arnn arrived at Hillsdale in 2000, after the longtime president, George C. Roche III, resigned amid revelations of an affair with his daughter-in-law, which came to light after her death by suicide. Arnn had been running the Claremont Institute, the prominent conservative think tank in California of which he was a founder. He had a reputation as a staunch ideologue in the mold of his onetime teacher, the political philosopher Harry Jaffa, author of Barry Goldwater’s lines that “extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice” and “moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.” Jaffa was the leader of a school of thought known as West Coast Straussianism, which holds that the Platonic ideal that is the original American republic has become corrupted by the unelected power of an ever-expanding administrative state and the corroding rot of progressivism. Arnn was an adherent. “Larry Arnn has the heart of a liberal,” a Claremont colleague once said. “He keeps it in a glass bottle on his desk.” In Arnn’s day, Claremont was a cloistered world; few foresaw it laying the theoretical groundwork for a radical transformation of the conservative movement. For Arnn, Hillsdale presented a chance to spread the gospel on a broader canvas, closer to the political ground. Founded in 1844 by Free Will Baptist abolitionists, the college had already turned rightward under Roche. But Arnn pivoted Hillsdale away from his predecessor’s libertarianism, then dominant in conservative politics, and put it on a more overtly religious and ideological path. While the college’s mission statement once invoked the “Judeo-Christian faith,” under Arnn the “Judeo” part was ditched and the school became more explicitly Christian. A new chapel patterned after London’s Church of St. Martin-in-the-Fields and financed by a $12.5 million donation from an Oklahoma sulfur magnate became an imposing architectural presence on campus. Arnn also honed a business model that has undergirded his political project. The college has rejected federal aid for decades, rather than be compelled to track admissions by race or comply with Title IX, the law that bars sex-based discrimination; Hillsdale has called the law “a serious assault on the school’s freedom.” As a result, more than half of its revenue comes from private grants, gifts or contracts, compared with 7 percent for a typical liberal-arts college, according to a report by the Institute of Education Sciences. Its fund-raising strategy is predicated on stoking outrage, with communiqués warning of “Marxist-inspired critical race theory” and an “emerging corporate-socialist totalitarianism.” Hillsdale has amplified its messaging by enlisting a digital fund-raising company called NextAfter, directing nearly $12 million to it in the college’s most recently reported fiscal year. Hillsdale’s revenue engine supports not just on-campus operations but also the many arms of its outreach — a newsletter called Imprimis (Latin for “above all”) that the school says reaches 6.4 million readers; a series of podcasts and online courses on subjects like “The American Left: From Liberalism to Despotism”; and a curriculum and training for a network of “classical” charter schools in more than a dozen states. All of this material is free, and all of it, in its ideological fervor, fuels the college’s fund-raising. “Hillsdale has adopted the strategy of radiating what occurs on its campus as far and wide, and to as many citizens, as possible,” according to words attributed to its chairman, the game-show host Pat Sajak, in a fund-raising pitch. (A longtime Arnn friend, Sajak is among Hollywood’s most outspoken conservatives.) The school has been lucrative for Arnn, whose total annual compensation exceeds $1 million, rare territory for the leader of a college of Hillsdale’s size. And there are other benefits. NextAfter promoted Arnn’s 2015 book on Winston Churchill as part of an effort to grow the college’s email list. (Hillsdale said Arnn donated his royalties to the college.) Arnn’s daughter Kathleen O’Toole was installed in 2019 as assistant provost for the college’s charter-school efforts. (Another Hillsdale official said in a recent deposition, related to a court battle involving a Florida charter school, that nobody else had been interviewed for the job; the college said Arnn “was not involved” in the hiring.) Arnn remains Claremont’s vice chairman, and from the first, he embedded Hillsdale into the institute’s intellectual orbit. Any number of Hillsdale academics are Claremont-affiliated scholars as well. (West Coast Straussianism’s “citadels are Claremont and Hillsdale,” according to the political philosopher Paul Gottfried.) Arnn also signed on visiting scholars like Christopher Rufo, the activist most responsible for making the academic discipline of critical race theory a boogeyman of the right. Arnn’s own CV lists longstanding affiliations with a run of influential conservative organizations. He serves on the Heritage Foundation’s board and is a member of the Council for National Policy, a secretive coalition of conservative heavyweights. Like others in his intellectual camp, Arnn seemed to love Trumpism more than the man himself. (“There’s obviously a lot of things that are really great about that guy, but we don’t teach our students at Hillsdale College to act the way he does on all occasions,” he quipped during a 2017 speech.) But the inflection point, both for Hillsdale and for American conservatism, was the election and reign of Trump. Money poured in from prominent donors with names like Coors, Koch and Uihlein. S. Prestley Blake, a founder of Friendly’s restaurants, left the college a Connecticut replica of Thomas Jefferson’s Monticello that Hillsdale uses for various events. The college’s revenue more than doubled; its endowment is now nearly $1 billion. Hillsdale became a regular stopping point for leaders on the right, from the Federalist Society co-chairman Leonard Leo to the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, who received an honorary doctorate. Justice Clarence Thomas, who has called Arnn a “dear friend,” spoke at the new chapel’s dedication. (His wife, the conservative activist Virginia Thomas, had previously served on Hillsdale’s board and worked at the college’s Washington outpost.) As Hillsdale made headlines by resisting state pandemic restrictions, Arnn found a soul mate in DeSantis, whose rising national profile was powered by his own shunning of Covid strictures. In its drive to remake Florida schools, DeSantis’s administration tapped Hillsdale to help overhaul civics standards and used a Hillsdale staff member and an undergraduate as consultants to review math textbooks for perceived whiffs of leftist ideology. DeSantis has said he prefers hiring Hillsdale alumni to those of his own alma mater, Yale, and when he engineered a takeover of the quirky and traditionally liberal New College of Florida, he appointed a top Hillsdale official, Matthew Spalding, to its new board. The new New College, the governor said, would be a public, Sunshine State Hillsdale. Clarence Thomas delivering a commencement address to the 2016 Hillsdale College graduating class. He has called Arnn a “dear friend.”Todd McInturf/The Detroit News, via Associated PressAll of this is evidence of how well Arnn had succeeded in embedding his college in the ferment. “We’re in the world-conquest business,” he said in an online talk that Hillsdale posted in 2020, “and we have just one weapon — teaching.”Three days after the 2020 election, Arnn appeared on a Hillsdale podcast hosted by the conservative pundit Hugh Hewitt. Calling the electoral process “corrupt,” Arnn mused about Republican-dominated state legislatures’ bypassing the voters and taking direct control of their states’ electoral votes. “There’s a wild idea,” he said. A couple of weeks later, around the time of the Giuliani meeting, he was asked on a podcast hosted by a Michigan conservative commentator, Steve Gruber, whether he trusted the outcome of the election. “No, I don’t,” he said. By then, Ian Northon, the Hillsdale-affiliated lawyer, was publicly advancing fraud claims and moving to sue the state of Michigan on behalf of the Amistad Project.“It’s simply a matter of mathematics,” Northon said on a different episode of Gruber’s podcast, in late November. “We’ve got a Ph.D., Dr. Zhang, Jennie Zhang from Hillsdale College, who just did the math. And when you do the math, it shows not just a handful of improper votes, or a handful of illegal votes, but hundreds of thousands, well over 500,000 in the general election alone.” He was referring to Qianying Zhang, a finance and economics professor who goes by Jennie and was paid $5,000 as an expert witness by Amistad. Based on a survey by a firm run by a former Trump campaign aide, she estimated how many people had received absentee ballots they had not requested. (In an email, Zhang said that while Northon had offered a “plausible” account of her findings, calling the votes “improper” or “illegal” went “beyond the direct scope of my analysis.”) In early December, Northon took part in a conference call with an old friend of Arnn’s from Claremont circles, the lawyer John Eastman. Northon, in his testimony to the House Jan. 6 committee, said this meeting, like the first one, “was set up by some Hillsdale people.” He specifically mentioned Spalding, dean of the college’s Washington graduate school, something of a nexus in the capital for academics on the right. Northon’s lawyer, Chip Chamberlain, said in an email exchange that neither Arnn nor Spalding was on the Eastman call. Northon, he said, simply “reviewed Dr. Spalding’s research on elections and constitutionalism before various filings with the courts.” (Spalding, in a statement through Hillsdale, said he had never met Northon.) Northon told the Jan. 6 committee that the two Michigan lawmakers who attended the Giuliani meeting participated in this one too, along with a third, Daire Rendon. (Rendon was charged last year in a separate case involving voting-machine breaches orchestrated by Trump allies.) The lawmakers “were people who wanted their colleagues in the House to do more,” Northon testified, adding, “That was the impetus of the Eastman call.” Eastman was one of the legal architects of the strategy to deploy fake electors in states Trump lost, in order to press Pence to forgo certifying Biden on Jan. 6. (He was indicted last year on charges related to this effort in Georgia, where he has pleaded not guilty.) Now, on the conference call, he explained to the lawmakers that the State Legislature held the power to take action on elections. “If somebody’s going to do something about it, it’s them,” Northon recalled Eastman saying. Northon also prepared a draft resolution for the Legislature’s Republican leaders, hoping they would declare that they were investigating the election. As he composed the draft, he said, he showed it to Norton and Emily Davis, Hillsdale’s communications chief. When House investigators asked Northon about his running election-related documents by Hillsdale’s brass, he said: “Well, my — I represented Hillsdale and all this — although this wasn’t something I was doing for them, I thought they should be aware of it, that it was happening. I thought it was important for them.” Around the same time, Norton reached out to the state Republican chairwoman, Laura Cox. According to her testimony to the Jan. 6 committee, the Hillsdale general counsel explained that there was a plan afoot to swing the state toward Trump: A group of Republicans posing as electors would hide overnight in the State Capitol in Lansing and then cast votes on Dec. 14, the date the official electors were to cast Michigan’s vote. Cox was aghast. “I told him in no uncertain terms that that was insane and inappropriate,” she testified. She said she tried to impress upon him that this was a “harebrained” plan, that it “was a very, very bad idea and potentially illegal.” But Norton, she said, “didn’t care about my opinion. Just, we had words, and I believe I eventually hung up on him.”Norton had come to Hillsdale from an automotive background — his father ran auto-service shops in the Detroit area — and after spending years as a lawyer working his way through the industry. In 1997, he was reprimanded by Michigan’s Attorney Discipline Board after admitting that “while shopping at a retail store, he placed a different bar-code price tag on a package of colored pencils in order to lower the price.” That hiccup did not stall his career, and in 2002 he became assistant general counsel at Chrysler. Seven years later, he left to join the Bradley Foundation, the conservative philanthropy that has been active in election issues. “It was time to take the more mission-driven path,” he said on a college-sponsored podcast. Arnn hired him in 2014. (The next year, Arnn received one of the Bradley Foundation’s annual $250,000 prizes.) Hillsdale disputes Cox’s account of her conversation with its general counsel. “Mr. Norton spoke with Ms. Cox in the capacity of a civically engaged individual who was asking a friend” about “the election and perceived irregularities,” the college says, adding that Norton had been “an early supporter” of Cox’s husband, the former Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox. Norton, the college says, did not know where Cox “got the idea” of a “supposed plot” for an overnight in the State Capitol.But Cox held fast to her account at a pretrial hearing for the fake electors in December. And in an interview, she said, “We’re not friends, I want to make that really clear,” and pointed out that she could find no record of Norton personally donating to her husband’s campaigns. She also provided a copy of a text message from Norton that she said was sent on Dec. 13, 2020. “The electors should try to get into capital early, as we have planned,” it said, noting that she would be hearing from a lawyer for the Trump campaign.“He kept texting me all these things and trying to lobby me to do something,” she said, adding, “They think they are going to hide in the Capitol and nobody is going to see them?”After learning about the planned sleepover, Cox told the Jan. 6 committee, she called Mike Shirkey, the leader of the State Senate’s Republican majority. Shirkey had been hearing from Norton and Northon, too: For days, they had been urging him to recognize the slate of fake Trump electors. Shirkey had also heard from Phillip Kline, the former Kansas attorney general who heads the Amistad Project, which was working with Trump lawyers to bring election-fraud lawsuits across the country. Kline later spoke at a Hillsdale symposium where he called 2020 “the most lawless election in United States history.”Shirkey, who retired last year with warnings of the peril of “one-world governance, one-world religion, one-world health care, one-world currency and one-world control,” might have seemed an unlikely resister. But according to Cox, he also thought hiding electors in the Capitol was a terrible idea. “It was a pretty high-pressured process, having these gentlemen come to our offices or invite us into one of their homes,” Shirkey said of the trio in his House testimony, adding that they kept urging him to “do the right thing.”On Dec. 14, Northon joined the fake electors at the Capitol, where they were turned away by guards. Not all of the 16 designated Trump electors picked before Election Day agreed to take part in the scheme; one who bowed out, Terri Lynn Land, was a former Michigan secretary of state who has said she did not see a role to play given that the state’s vote had already been certified for Biden. The remaining electors and two replacements ended up in the basement of the state Republican headquarters, signing a document entitled “Certificate of Votes of the 2020 Electors From Michigan.” For Shirkey, the weeks since the election had been an unending ordeal. He was part of the Michigan contingent lobbied at the White House in mid-November. And Trump kept calling — four times through Dec. 14, once while Shirkey was up in a tree stand, hunting. “I was getting frustrated,” he testified. “All these allegations, all these claims, and all the damage, potential damage we’re doing to the country and confidence in elections. And I was tired of hollow claims with no action. And I just wanted to put a pin in it. I didn’t want any more calls.”Growing up in the small Arkansas city of Pocahontas, Arnn wasn’t obviously destined for a life of academe. He often describes the personally transformative effects of studying philosophy, which took hold in a political-theory course his senior year at Arkansas State.“We read Plato’s ‘Republic,’ and it was life-changing,” he once told The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. “I fell under its spell.”Alumni, with varying degrees of admiration and exasperation, describe Arnn, who is 71, as evincing a grandfatherly pop intellectualism. He keeps a longstanding routine of stopping by the cafeteria to ask students about the nature of “the good, the true and the beautiful.” Pence, who has called Arnn a mentor, began a 2018 commencement speech at Hillsdale by assuring the students that “unlike Dr. Arnn, I will not be asking you to define ‘the good.’” Arnn’s speaking style meanders — sometimes beyond the typically circumscribed utterances of college presidents. Hillsdale likes to talk about its abolitionist roots, but one thing it doesn’t talk about publicly is the racial makeup of its student body. (Students and alumni I spoke with say there is little racial diversity.) At a legislative hearing in 2013, Arnn recalled that the school had been admonished by the state because, as he put it, “we didn’t have enough dark ones.” Asked to clarify, according to press accounts, he explained that the state had sent people “with clipboards” to campus “to look at the colors of people’s faces and write down what they saw. We don’t keep records of that information. What were they looking for besides dark ones?”In 2022, a plan by Gov. Bill Lee of Tennessee to create 50 Hillsdale-affiliated charter schools faltered after the Nashville TV station WTVF obtained video of Arnn, in public comments at a Hillsdale reception with the governor, declaring that teachers “are trained in the dumbest parts of the dumbest colleges.” He later tried to explain in a Tennessean column that by “dumb” he didn’t “mean ‘unintelligent’” but “ ‘ill-conceived’ or ‘misdirected.’” Tom Griscom, who led the state’s charter-school commission, was sent the article by a colleague, and in an email uncovered by the TV station, he lamented, “That really helped, not.” In the aftermath of the 2020 election, Arnn was speaking in dire terms. “We are Americans, and have the dangerous privilege of living in a time when the whole direction of the country and the whole view of human nature it adopts is up for grabs,” he said in a Hillsdale podcast on Dec. 4 that focused on the Senate runoffs in Georgia. No evidence has emerged suggesting that Arnn was involved in the Michigan fake-electors scheme. But in a rambling speech at a Hillsdale-sponsored conference in Phoenix a month after Trump left office, he appeared to acknowledge knowing something about the activities of his general counsel. “I’ll tell you what happened in Michigan,” Arnn said. Speaking about the State Legislature and its role in the election, he said: “We know them. My general counsel has spent, his hair is gray, he’s been spending time with them. And he gives them advice for nothing.” Arnn added that he had thought all along that the Legislature should assert its power over the electors, once state leaders began altering voting rules amid the pandemic. “You’re changing it, we reserve the right to pick our own slate.”On Dec. 18, Arnn was in Washington, where he was named to lead Trump’s 1776 Commission, announced as a rejoinder to the George Floyd racial-justice upheavals, which the president called “the direct result of decades of left-wing indoctrination in our schools.” (It was also framed as a response to “The 1619 Project,” published the previous year by The New York Times Magazine.) The commission, according to Trump’s executive order, was to prepare a report on “the core principles of the American founding and how these principles may be understood to further enjoyment of ‘the blessings of liberty.’” That report, released two days before Trump left office, was widely derided by historians as a politicized, soft-focus version of American history; it took particular aim at progressivism, which it lumped in with slavery, fascism, communism, racism and identity politics as one of the “challenges to America’s principles.” Arnn’s standing in Trumpworld, though, was complicated by the fact that he was far closer to Pence than to Trump. Indeed, even as Trump was imploring the vice president to block the election certification in the House, Arnn was counseling caution. When Arnn returned to the White House on Jan. 5 for the first meeting of the 1776 Commission, he also met briefly with the vice president, according to Pence’s aide, Marc Short. And two days after the Capitol riot, Arnn told Hugh Hewitt: “You know, the vice president asked me more than once, What should he do? And I said, ‘Well, there are some boundaries.’ I said: ‘The first thing is, you probably ought to say, this is not about me and Donald Trump anymore. This is about fair elections.’” Last year, introducing Pence at a Hillsdale function, Arnn went further, saying he had agreed with the former vice president’s ultimate decision. Which is not to say that Arnn didn’t harbor deep reservations about the election. During the podcast interview, he said he had “floated the crazy idea” that Trump should’ve said, “If I vindicate this election and prove that I won it, I’ll surrender to Mike Pence in 30 days because it’s questionable.” By February, Arnn was talking about the country sinking into despotism. “I’ve been warning about all this all my life, warning that they’re going to rig the electoral system so you can’t get them out,” he said in his remarks in Phoenix. “And now it’s happened, right? Probably.” He knew “how Michigan was stolen,” he said earlier in the speech, “because I have the misfortune sometimes to live there.” In Michigan, the fight over 2020 continues. In late October, Dana Nessel, the attorney general, dropped all charges against one of the fake electors in exchange for cooperation. During an interview with the office’s investigators, the elector was asked if he could identify photos of a handful of figures involved; among them was Norton, the Hillsdale general counsel. (The elector was unsure.) In the days that followed, her investigators questioned one of the architects of the multistate fake-elector scheme, Kenneth Chesebro, according to one of his lawyers. Both developments suggest the inquiry could widen. The attorney for Northon, the Hillsdale-affiliated private lawyer, said investigators had contacted him about interviewing his client, who had declined to participate. During the recent pretrial hearing, Nessel’s office described Northon as an “uncharged member of the conspiracy.”Pointing fingers upward will clearly be a defense strategy. John Freeman, a Michigan lawyer who represents a Trump elector, told me that his client “followed the directions of persons better versed and more knowledgeable in election law” and that “we intend to establish this in court.”Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida at an appearance with Larry Arnn, president of Hillsdale College, in April. DeSantis has said of the college, “How many places other than Hillsdale are actually standing for truth?”Chris duMond/Getty ImagesHeading into the coming presidential election, Arnn has hedged his bets. He has called DeSantis “one of the most important people living,” but remains neutral on the Republican field — “counselor to many and endorser of none,” as Hugh Hewitt put it in October. But with Trump, at least for now, lapping the field, the election could herald the moment for the ideas so long promoted by Arnn and his Hillsdale-Claremont comrades. In a second administration, Trump and his allies are determined to engineer a sweeping transformation of American government, including a further repudiation of America as a land of immigrants and a politicization of the Justice Department and other agencies of the executive branch. This gutting of the reviled administrative state would be enabled by a legion of lawyers with an Olympian view of presidential powers — at least while a Republican sits in the White House.Arnn’s college is at the leading edge of the planning. Two fellows at Hillsdale’s Washington campus — one current and one former — are associate directors of Project 2025, a clearinghouse created by the Heritage Foundation to staff and overhaul policy in a new conservative administration; it counts Hillsdale among 80 organizations on its advisory board. One of those fellows, Troup Hemenway, previously drafted a report examining how the Presidential Personnel Office can be harnessed more aggressively. Another recent Hillsdale fellow, Saurabh Sharma, co-founded a group called American Moment, which seeks to staff the next administration and congressional offices with MAGA adherents. James Sherk, a Hillsdale alumnus at a think tank called the America First Policy Institute, has crafted a plan central to Trump’s ambitions, removing civil-service protections from thousands of career government officials and replacing them with loyalists. Hillsdale’s student body is similarly evolving, at least in the reckoning of Avery Noel, a senior from Indiana who is president of the school’s small College Democrats chapter. Applications have climbed more than 50 percent over the last decade, the college has said, including a spike of interest after the school rebuffed pandemic lockdown requirements. “You’re getting people who are more drawn to the ideological setting of the school,” said Noel, who described himself as a lapsed conservative. In an email exchange, Nathan Schlueter, a philosophy professor, explained what seemed to be a prevailing view. “Progressives currently control virtually all the levers of financial and political power in this country,” he said, adding, “They have been aggressive not only in promoting causes about which Americans reasonably disagree, but in shaming and punishing dissenting voices. In this atmosphere, the College is extremely vulnerable.”To some, though, the college is the emergent bully. A number of Hillsdale graduate students have become active in local government. In 2022, Joshua Paladino, a doctoral candidate in politics who served on the city’s public library board, proposed that the library’s children’s section exclude books “tending to corrupt the morals of youth,” including those depicting “delinquency, child abuse, underage sexual activity,” as well as “graphic violence” and “profanity.” He suggested proscribing books with any reference to political content, including the L.G.B.T.Q. movement and Black Lives Matter. In an interview, Paladino said the library wasn’t “focusing on the books that were going to have long-term, lasting value.” Soon library board meetings became more crowded and angry, and the librarian, the children’s librarian and the library board president all departed. Soon after, one of the college’s librarians took over as the library board president. “There’s always been this rift, the college elites and us townies,” says Penny Swan, a Republican who was defeated by Paladino in the 2022 City Council election. “But it’s never been as bad as it’s been in the past couple years, and the college Ph.D. students seem to want to take over the town.” On campus, a legal challenge emerged in October, when two women filed class-action litigation claiming that Hillsdale officials including Norton had sought to hide sexual assaults rather than seriously investigate them. One plaintiff, Danielle Villarreal, who transferred to another school, said in an interview that Arnn was “too busy trying to kind of promote Hillsdale’s reputation for truth and liberty and ignoring the contradictions that are already within.” (The college said the suit was based on “serious mischaracterizations” of its processes, as well as its actions.) Contradictions were on the minds of the nearly two dozen students and alumni who sought me out after hearing about my reporting on social media or from friends. Almost all expressed gratitude for their liberal-arts education and said that, despite the hard-edged pitch to donors, Hillsdale had nurtured the critical-thinking skills that led them to reject Trumpism. But many felt revulsion at the public coziness between the college and the former president. “The undergraduate college has been used as a base for the intervention into American politics,” said Will Smiley, class of 2005. Arnn, he added, “was lending the institutional credibility of Hillsdale to Donald Trump.”Anna Meckel arrived at Hillsdale in 2014 as a star student celebrated in The Omaha World-Herald with the headline “Home-Schooled Nebraska Senior Tallies Perfect SAT, ACT Scores.” She came from a conservative family but had been drawn to Hillsdale by its focus on the classics, not its politics. Yet even as she thrived academically, she found her values unmoored from the emergent brand of conservatism espoused by Arnn and his administration. In an interview, she recalled her graduation, in May 2018. She was the valedictorian. Pence delivered the commencement address, declaring that the Trump administration was “advancing the very principles that you learned here in the halls at Hillsdale.”“I was sitting there in the audience in tears, in embarrassment and frustration,” Meckel told me. “This is supposed to be the culmination of the education that I received, and instead the school is making a mockery of itself.” She added: “I was literally crying. I’m going to sound like a snowflake, I guess, but whatever. It was a travesty. Another student heard me crying and reached out to me afterward and said, ‘This isn’t the send-off we deserved.’”Meckel sent me a link to a fund-raising pitch that cited one of the college’s free online courses, on Dante. It warned that “the Biden administration is trying to force critical race theory into K-12 curricula” and offered the poet as an antidote to “the Left’s assault on American education.”“It’s not about Dante or the ‘Iliad’ or the ‘Odyssey,’” she said. “It’s about getting clicks and views from people who want to own the libs and be enraged by the Biden administration or by cancel culture. And that’s nothing like what I was taught in the classroom when we went through great books. My professors didn’t say anything about reading Dante to own the libs.”Opening photo illustration: Source photographs by Leigh Vogel for The New York Times (Arnn); Chris duMond/Getty Images (school); Scott Olson/Getty Images (Trump); Ethan Miller/Getty Images (Pence).Joan Wong is a photocollagist and a book-cover designer who frequently collaborates with The Times, The New Yorker and The Atlantic. She previously worked for Penguin Random House. More

  • in

    The Best, Worst and Weirdest Political Stories of 2023

    It has been such a special political year, brimming with extraordinary, even historic moments. From an ex-president indicted to a Senate staffer busted for making porn at work, each fresh development made you proud to be an American.Singling out the exceptional events and players was tougher than ever. I mean, when Marjorie Taylor Greene doesn’t even merit a mention …. But making hard calls is part of my job, and the true standouts deserve a shout-out.Most Likely to Be Picked Last in Gym Class: Matt GaetzMany Americans fantasize about taking up their pitchforks and storming the boss’s office. But in the history of Congress, only this Florida Man has succeeded — metaphorically, of course — leading a coup against his own party’s speaker. The ouster of Kevin McCarthy, followed by the chaotic scramble for his replacement, became a slow-rolling, breathtaking fiasco that ground the House to a halt and made the entire Republican conference look like a pack of petty, pouty, incompetent preschoolers. Way to build the brand, guys!Most Fabulous Fabulist: George SantosMany politicians lie, but this recently ousted congressman from New York approached the task with a baroque panache of which few could even conceive. Falsely asserting that the Sept. 11 attacks “claimed” his mother’s life? That he was a college volleyball star? That he was a producer of the Broadway atrocity “Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark”? So macabre. So pointless. So bizarre. Cannot wait to see his next act.Slowest Learner: Robert MenendezLet’s say you got yourself indicted on federal corruption charges that, luckily for you, ultimately resulted in a hung jury. What lesson would you learn from the experience? The senior senator from New Jersey seems to have taken his 2017 near miss as a license to go all in on the sketchy behavior. He was indicted again, and accused of a yearslong bribery scheme in which he took hundreds of thousands of dollars in exchange for serving the interests of three New Jersey businessmen — and of the government of Egypt. Mr. Menendez insists he has done nothing wrong and that the government is engaged in “primitive hunting.” Anything’s possible. But the gold bars and envelopes fat with cash stashed around his house are not a good look.Worst Date Night: Lauren BoebertProps to the Colorado congresswoman for putting the thrill back into taking your kids to the theater: Hey, honey, are you sure our “Beetlejuice” seats are in the no-groping section?Least Likely to Succeed: The Republican-led HouseLet’s give it up for one of the most dysfunctional, unproductive Congresses of modern times!Least Surprising Downfall: Kevin McCarthyAt this point, what is left for me to say about this tragically hollow figure? He sold his soul and betrayed American democracy for nine lousy months in the speaker’s chair. Once dethroned, he wasted no time packing up his toys and slinking out of the House — which may have been his first smart move in years.Most Boring Reboot: Impeachment, the Joe Biden versionAlso known as Donald Trump’s revenge.Worst Catchphrase: BidenomicsNo, no, no. The administration geniuses who embraced this sad portmanteau should be tried for political malpractice. And even if you can’t stop the spread, people, don’t let the president tweet about it!Biggest Turnaround: John FettermanThe early months of 2023 were rough for the Pennsylvania senator, who was struggling with the lingering effects of a stroke and wound up hospitalized for depression. Even many of his fans were wondering: Was he up to the job? But at some point he found his mojo and began calling out political B.S. wherever he perceived it, often to the dismay of progressives. He has come out swinging for Israel, called out fellow Democrats who fail to grasp that “it isn’t xenophobic to be concerned about the border” and dinged Gavin Newsom, the attention-thirsty governor of California. He denounced the planned acquisition of U.S. Steel by a Japanese company. And he went hard at his colleague Mr. Menendez for allegedly being a corrupt sleazeball, including paying Mr. Santos to record a troll-y video advising “Bobby from New Jersey” on how to ride out a scandal. Agree with him or not, the guy is en fuego.Best Poison Pen: Mitt Romney and Liz CheneyWe have a tie! First came “Romney: A Reckoning,” McKay Coppins’s book in which the retiring Republican senator and erstwhile presidential nominee laments the sad devolution of his political party. Then, just in time for the holiday gifting season, Ms. Cheney topped the best-seller list with “Oath and Honor” — which isn’t, as its subtitle proclaims, “A Memoir and a Warning” so much as an evisceration of Mr. McCarthy and other Trump toadies. So festive!Biggest Masochist: Mike JohnsonAt this point, what sensible person would want to be speaker of the House?Best Breakout Performance: Nikki HaleyAs the lone woman in the Republican presidential primary debates, she repeatedly outshone the other candidates, giving a big boost to her campaign for top Trump understudy.Biggest Flop: Ron DeSantisAfter all the hype, it turns out that “Trump without the crazy” is just an awkward, aggrieved, opportunistic, anti-charismatic, aspiring autocrat with a mile-wide cruel streak and the people skills of Mark Zuckerberg crossed with Richard Nixon.Most Likely to Be Given an Atomic Wedgie: Vivek RamaswamyIf Ms. Haley doesn’t get him, Chris Christie will.Most Pathetic Nepo Baby: Robert F. Kennedy Jr.Seriously, man: Put your shirt back on, spare us the anti-vax lunacy and stop pretending you are some courageous anti-establishment rebel outsider. Your last name is Kennedy, for God’s sake.Most Problematic Nepo Baby: Hunter BidenA lot of families have their own version of Hunter. And the president’s unconditional love for his troubled child is heartwarming. That said, with an impeachment investigation and his re-election campaign heating up, Biden père needs to finally figure out how to handle questions and accusations about his younger son without losing his cool or sounding defensive. Also, standing by Hunter is one thing. Letting him slouch around at a state dinner is quite another.Biggest Loser: Fox NewsThe network agreed to pay $787.5 million to settle a defamation suit with Dominion Voting Systems. But even without a messy trial, the case revealed plenty about the conservative outlet’s willingness to lie to viewers. Plus, in the process, the Murdochs felt compelled to cut loose their biggest, most unhinged MAGA star, Tucker Carlson — much to the disappointment of his “postmenopausal fans.” And oh, yeah, there is another defamation suit, this one from Smartmatic, still grinding on. So much winning.Runner-Up: Rudy GiulianiThis month, a federal jury ordered the man previously known as America’s mayor to pay two former Georgia election workers $148 million in damages for defaming them in the course of spreading election fraud lies. Immediately after the ruling, Mr. Giuliani re-upped his lies about the women, prompting them to sue him again. A couple of days later, he filed for bankruptcy protection. It’s all a bold strategy. Let’s see if it pays off for him.Biggest Legal Curveball: The Colorado Supreme CourtOn Dec. 19, the Colorado Supreme Court found that Mr. Trump had participated in an insurrection and is thus barred from holding office again under the 14th amendment. The stunner of a ruling disqualifies the Republican front-runner from appearing on the state’s presidential primary ballot. Similar suits in other states have fallen flat, and the Trump campaign said it is appealing this decision to the U.S. Supreme Court — which, it should be noted, includes three justices appointed by Mr. Trump. Just when you thought the 2024 election couldn’t get any weirder.Speaking of the MAGA king: As usual, he was ineligible for our regular awards, seeing as how he operates in a political class all his own. That said, it seems appropriate to recognize his historic status as the first former president to be criminally indicted. Big time. We’re talking 91 felony counts, state and federal, ranging from obstruction of justice to racketeering. Is this achievement more or less notable than his being the only president to earn two impeachments? Hard to say. But at this rate, to distinguish himself in 2024, Mr. Trump will need to go really big — perhaps by running for president from prison?Source photographs: Haley: Madeleine Hordinski for The New York Times; Kennedy: Mark Makela/Reuters; Giuliani: Jose Luis Magana/Associated Press.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, X and Threads. More

  • in

    The Unsettling Truth at the Heart of the Giuliani Case

    No sooner did a jury deliver a nearly $150 million defamation judgment against the former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani than he went out and again started smearing the two Georgia election workers at the center of the case. Within days, he filed for bankruptcy, shielding himself in the near term from having to surrender whatever assets he has to his creditors.His brazen thumbing of his nose at the jury and the legal system laid bare some unsettling truths about justice. Defamation law is one of the few tools that lawyers have to hold people accountable for using lies to destroy reputations and to deter wrongdoing. In the aftermath of the 2020 election, county clerks, election officials and other public servants targeted by politically motivated conspiracy theories like the Big Lie have used defamation lawsuits to try to clear their names and correct the public record.But in a hyperpartisan era when the incentives to tell lies about your political opponents can seemingly outweigh the risks, is defamation law still up to the task? And if admitted liars like Mr. Giuliani can avoid having to pay up, what does accountability even look like now?Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss, the two election workers who sued Mr. Giuliani for falsely claiming that they stole the 2020 election in Georgia for Joe Biden, will probably only ever see pennies on the dollar of the full amount that a Washington, D.C., jury awarded them.There are a few procedural hurdles to clear: The bankruptcy proceedings will hinge on whether a judge decides that Mr. Giuliani’s actions were “willful and malicious.” (If they were, he’ll still have to pay, even in bankruptcy.) Then there’s the question of whether he has the money to pay his debts. According to his bankruptcy petition, he has $1 million to $10 million in assets — nowhere close to what he’d need to clear the roughly $153 million he says he owes in total. (That number doesn’t include ongoing lawsuits against him that could also lead to financial settlements.) Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss could negotiate a settlement with him or choose to pursue a percentage of his assets and earnings for the rest of his working life.Recouping any money in a defamation judgment can take time. After juries in Connecticut and Texas found Infowars founder Alex Jones liable for more than $1.4 billion for spreading lies and conspiracy theories about the Sandy Hook school shooting, the families of victims who sued him and his businesses have spent the past year fighting him in bankruptcy. Only after a judge ruled that Mr. Jones’s conduct had met the “willful and malicious” standard did he finally propose a greatly reduced settlement of $5.5 million per year for five years and then a percentage of his business income for the next five. (The Sandy Hook families, who filed their suits nearly six years ago, have offered their own plan to liquidate all of Mr. Jones’s existing assets and to pursue his future earnings to collect on their jury verdict.)But victory for plaintiffs in cases like these is not limited to money. A trial gives victims of viral disinformation a chance to confront their tormentor in a court of law, where facts and procedures still matter, offering them a real sense of catharsis and vindication. Especially in cases that involve major news events, defamation suits can also help correct the public record. The trial in Freeman v. Giuliani not only proved that Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss had not done any of the criminal acts Mr. Giuliani alleged; it exhaustively debunked one of the biggest conspiracy theories to emerge from the 2020 presidential election.Tens of thousands of articles and TV segments amplified the trial’s findings to a massive audience. “This case was never about making Ruby and Shaye rich,” said Michael J. Gottlieb, the lead lawyer for the two women. “Of course, we wanted them to be compensated. But it was about accountability and establishing a public record of the truth about what happened at State Farm Arena in November 2020.”On a societal level, the real hope for these defamation cases is that over time, as more liars are brought low by their actions and held accountable in court, politicians and political operatives will pause before spreading disinformation and, slowly, this country will move toward a better, safer political discourse. For now, that seems overly optimistic. The twisted incentives created by extreme polarization and a fragmented media landscape might lead a young up-and-comer in conservative (or liberal, for that matter) politics to traffic in disinformation and conspiracy theories if that is the quickest way to fame, fortune and influence — consequences be damned.Our society counts on defamation judgments to draw a line between truth and falsity, and “we don’t imagine that there will routinely be recalcitrant defendants who will feel the incentive to lie to audiences that are eager to accept those lies is greater than the incentive to abide by the rule of law,” said RonNell Andersen Jones, a University of Utah law professor and media expert. “Our libel system doesn’t really envision those dynamics.” Libel law itself may be outdated — too slow or too weak to reckon with the realities of modern politics.But there is reason to hope. As the Giuliani case shows, deterrence can take many forms. When Mr. Giuliani uttered more lies about Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss shortly after the verdict, they filed a new lawsuit in the same court, seeking an injunction to prevent him from continuing to defame them. If successful, that case could be the strongest protection they have from getting drawn into the spotlight once more.Even without an injunction, now that a court has ruled that Mr. Giuliani defamed the two women with actual malice — meaning he knowingly or recklessly made the false statements in question — media outlets large and small may be hesitant to give him a platform. Even if the judgment doesn’t chasten Mr. Giuliani, it will almost surely make networks like Fox News and One America News think twice before they put him on the air.More than updating defamation law or passing new legislation, the way to send a signal to future Rudy Giulianis and Alex Joneses is by defending victims of widespread lies — and the larger truth — at scale. One of the legal organizations that represented Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss, Protect Democracy, is attempting to do just that. The group is also representing them in a separate lawsuit against the right-wing blog The Gateway Pundit and is representing a Pennsylvania postal worker smeared by Project Veritas, a county recorder in Arizona attacked by the Republican candidate Kari Lake and a voter in Georgia accused of being a “ballot mule” by Dinesh D’Souza.These cases will test whether our legal system can evolve to meet the challenges posed by our viral era. But at the least, Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss have shown that you don’t have to be rich or powerful to achieve justice.Andy Kroll (@AndyKroll) is a reporter at ProPublica and the author of “A Death on W Street: The Murder of Seth Rich and the Age of Conspiracy.”The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, X and Threads. More

  • in

    Judge Orders Giuliani to Pay $148 Million Damage Award Immediately

    A federal judge found that Rudolph Giuliani had a history of hiding assets and that he must swiftly pay two Georgia election workers he was found to have defamed.A federal judge on Wednesday ordered Rudolph W. Giuliani to immediately pay the $148 million he owes to two former Georgia election workers for falsely accusing them of manipulating ballots after the 2020 election, citing concerns that he might “conceal his assets” if he were allowed to wait.The decision by the judge, Beryl A. Howell, was the latest legal defeat for Mr. Giuliani, who is facing an array of woes for his efforts three years ago to keep former President Donald J. Trump in office after his election defeat. But even though Judge Howell ordered speedy payment, there is no indication that Mr. Giuliani, whose long-running financial problems have only been intensifying, has anywhere near the amount he owes.On Monday, a few days after a jury in Washington imposed the damages on Mr. Giuliani, the election workers, Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss, asked Judge Howell to waive the standard 30-day waiting period and force him to pay them as soon as possible.In their request to Judge Howell, the women, who are mother and daughter, said that Mr. Giuliani had already failed to obey other court orders in the case related to money that he owed them. They also noted that Mr. Giuliani, a onetime U.S. attorney and mayor of New York, was being hounded by his creditors, including his former lawyer, and was saddled by “significant debts threatening his personal solvency.”“There is especially good reason,” lawyers for the women wrote, “to believe that defendant Giuliani intends to evade payment of the judgment by any means he can devise.”In a 13-page order, Judge Howell agreed with virtually everything Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss said about Mr. Giuliani, who admitted that he lied about the women in advance of his trial this month to determine damages in Federal District Court in Washington. Before the trial began, Judge Howell found that Mr. Giuliani was liable for defamation, civil conspiracy and intentional infliction of emotional distress.At the trial, Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss described how they were subjected to a torrent of threats and racist abuse after Mr. Giuliani, then the personal lawyer to Mr. Trump, directed his millions of social media followers to watch a video of them in a Georgia vote counting center, asserting without any basis that they were cheating Mr. Trump as they counted votes on Election Day.“Giuliani just messed me up, you know,” Ms. Freeman told the jury.The decision on Wednesday to speed up the payments was warranted, Judge Howell wrote, given Mr. Giuliani’s history as an “uncooperative litigant.” The judge said he had a record of disregarding her orders to pay the women’s legal fees and costs related to requests for discovery material.“Giuliani feebly counters concerns about him hiding assets, stating that there is no evidence in the record of any attempt by him to dissipate assets,” she wrote. “This statement simply ignores the ample record in this case of Giuliani’s efforts to conceal or hide his assets.”While Mr. Giuliani could still appeal the damages awarded by the jury, Judge Howell pointed out that the sum the jurors came up with was actually “conservative.” As part of his appeal, he could ask for a stay of immediate payment — though, as Judge Howell noted, he would still have to post a surety bond to show that he was good for at least some portion of the money if he lost. More

  • in

    Georgia Election Workers Sue Giuliani Again

    Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss asked a federal judge to bar Rudolph Giuliani from continuing to make unfounded accusations that they cheated Donald Trump out of votes in the 2020 election.Two former Georgia election workers who successfully sued Rudolph W. Giuliani for spreading baseless lies about them after the 2020 presidential election sued him again on Monday, seeking to bar him from continuing to repeat those falsehoods.Lawyers for the election workers, Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss, also asked the Federal District Court in Washington on Monday to force Mr. Giuliani to pay the $148 million in damages he owes the women immediately because of his financial troubles. Typically, there is a 30-day delay before a defendant can be forced to pay.On Friday, a jury awarded the damages to Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss for the destruction of their reputations and the infliction of significant emotional strain.During the weeklong trial to determine the amount of compensation and in the days after, Mr. Giuliani, speaking in interviews and to reporters outside the courthouse, reasserted his debunked claims that the women sought to deprive President Donald J. Trump of victory as they counted votes in Fulton County, Ga., on Nov. 3, 2020.In the new lawsuit, Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss are asking that the court force Mr. Giuliani to stop making the baseless allegations.The two actions on Monday signal that the women will continue to press their case aggressively against Mr. Giuliani after the jury’s verdict on Friday.Mr. Giuliani’s false accusations about Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss began when he was serving as Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer. At the time, he was helping to lead Mr. Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election.“Defendant Giuliani has proven himself to be an exceptionally recalcitrant litigant, and has demonstrated an unwillingness to comply with judicial process, including orders to pay attorney’s fees and costs,” according to Monday’s court filing in the women’s first lawsuit against Mr. Giuliani.“There is especially good reason to believe that Defendant Giuliani intends to evade payment of the judgment by any means he can devise,” the filing said.Mr. Giuliani has refused to turn over to the court information about his assets that could establish his net worth. Lawyers for Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss said there was a “substantial risk” that Mr. Giuliani would liquidate what assets he had before the women saw any of the damages.After the verdict on Friday, a lawyer familiar with his legal situation said Mr. Giuliani was likely to file for bankruptcy.Mr. Giuliani is being sued by a former lawyer for unpaid bills and faces another defamation suit stemming from his work seeking to keep Mr. Trump in power. He is also under criminal indictment in Georgia related to these efforts.E. Jean Carroll, a former advice columnist and fixture in Manhattan’s media circles, won a defamation lawsuit against Mr. Trump this year. But like Mr. Giuliani, Mr. Trump continued to defame her, and so she sued him again.Paying damages can be dragged out for years.Alan Feuer More

  • in

    Giuliani Was Ordered to Pay $148 Million. What Happens Now?

    The two election workers who sued Rudolph W. Giuliani for defamation won’t be paid right away, and the judge could change the amount awarded by the jury.A federal jury in Washington ordered Rudolph W. Giuliani last week to pay $148 million in damages to two former Georgia election workers he defamed by spreading baseless claims that they tried to steal votes from Donald J. Trump on Nov. 3, 2020.Mr. Giuliani, who faces a litany of legal and financial troubles, has said he will appeal the verdict.Here’s what happens next:The judge will order a judgment on what Mr. Giuliani must pay.The jury awarded the two former poll workers, Ruby Freeman and her daughter, Shaye Moss, who are Black, $148 million. That was after they gave hours of emotional testimony describing the relentless threats and attacks they received, including from people who said they should be hanged for treason or lynched. The total included a combined $75 million in punitive damages; compensatory damages of $16.2 million to Ms. Freeman and $16.9 million to Ms. Moss; and $20 million to each of them for emotional suffering.Before Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss can collect any money, the judge, Beryl A. Howell of the Federal District Court in Washington, will need to enter a judgment ordering the amount Mr. Giuliani is required to pay. In civil cases like this one, the judge can change the amount determined by the jury.Once Judge Howell rules on the amount, Mr. Giuliani can appeal the decision.The money will not come immediately.“Defense lawyers can string out these cases for pretty substantial periods of time before payments actually have to be made,” said Robert L. Rabin, a professor at Stanford Law School with expertise on torts and compensations.If Mr. Giuliani appeals the verdict, Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss could ask the judge to make him post a bond to secure some of his assets while an appeal is pending, said Christopher M. Mattei, a lawyer who represented the Sandy Hook families in their defamation case against the Infowars founder Alex Jones.The women can also request a special proceeding to look into ways to collect the judgment from him, such as garnishing his wages. Mr. Giuliani, who served as the mayor of New York City and as a federal prosecutor, cannot currently work as a lawyer because of disciplinary actions against him.Mr. Giuliani refused to comply with the court’s requirement to disclose financial documents that would show his net worth, including how much money he makes from media endeavors such as his podcast.And at any point, Mr. Giuliani and Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss could agree on a settlement.Mr. Giuliani will still be on the hook, even in bankruptcy.After Friday’s verdict, Mr. Giuliani was likely to file for bankruptcy protection, according to a lawyer familiar with his legal situation.The damages he owes Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss are considered an “intentional tort,” meaning Mr. Giuliani was aware of what he was doing when he defamed the women by spreading baseless lies about election fraud, and bankruptcy would not erase his liability.“It may be that Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss are able to chase Rudy Giuliani to his grave to catch every penny they can out of his pockets,” Barbara L. McQuade, a University of Michigan law professor, said recently on MSNBC. Ms. McQuade was a U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan from 2010 to 2017.If Mr. Giuliani, who is 79, dies before Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss receive compensation, they could still collect compensatory and emotional damages against his estate, Mr. Rabin said.Mr. Giuliani faces additional legal challenges.Mr. Giuliani is under indictment in Georgia. A local prosecutor brought racketeering charges against him, Mr. Trump and others for their efforts to overturn the election results in Georgia.He faces a defamation suit from Dominion Voting Systems, one of the largest voting machine vendors in the country. The company accused Mr. Giuliani of spreading lies about the company as part of his efforts to keep Mr. Trump in office.Mr. Giuliani’s former lawyer, Robert J. Costello, is also suing him for $1.3 million in unpaid legal fees. And a former employee, Noelle Dunphy, filed a lawsuit in May, claiming that Mr. Giuliani harassed and assaulted her beginning in 2019. Mr. Giuliani has denied the allegations. More