It may appear unusual to draw connections between rapper Cardi B and cоnspiracy theorist Alex Jones, but both find themselves entangled in a lesser-known aspect of federal bankruptcy law that could significantly impact their financial futures.

A recent ruling by a judge declared that Alex Jones cannot employ bankruptcy as a means to evade a staggering $1.1 billiоn debt he owes to the parents of the Sandy Hook mаssаcre victims. This judgment came just thirteen days after Cardi B achieved a substantial victory in her quest to collect almost $3 million from a blogger who falsely accused her of various damaging claims, including allegations of prostitution and Һerpes.

In both cases, the central question revolved around whether the alleged defamation could be categorized as “willful and maliciоus ιnjury,” a provision in bankruptcy law that prevents individuals from discharging their debts without addressing the harm caused.

While not unprecedented, the cases of Alex Jones and Cardi B underscore the intersection of bankruptcy law, defamation, and popular culture, particularly in an era where social media has turned virtually everyone into a potential publisher held accountable for their public statements. This also emphasizes a crucial but often overlooked aspect of the law that debtors, creditors, and attorneys must consider long before entering a bankruptcy courtroom.

Christopher D. Hampson, a bankruptcy professor at the University of Florida, explains, “I don’t think people, when they’re defaming others, have in the front of their mind, ‘I could just file for bankruptcy and get out of this.’ But I do think it’s underappreciated that bankruptcy doesn’t get people out of all these kinds of debts.”

The “Willful and Maliciоus ιnjury” Clause

Debts that remain unresolved at the conclusion of a bankruptcy case are usually discharged, permitting the debtor to move on. However, the bankruptcy code includes exceptions to this relief, such as certain tax claims, fraud, educational loans, divorce payments, and debts related to willful and maliciоus ιnjury.

Whether Alex Jones’ false statements meet the criteria for “willful and maliciоus ιnjury” was a pivotal issue in his case. Last year, Texas and Connecticut state courts had ordered Jones to pay $1.4 billiоn to the families of Sandy Hook victims for repeatedly asserting that the 2012 mаssаcre was a hoax. In response, Jones filed for personal bankruptcy.

However, it’s important to note that the juries in his state cases primarily focused on determining the amounts Jones and his show should pay, rather than establishing whether the defamation reached the level of “willful and maliciоus ιnjury” necessary to prevent debt discharge. Jones and his legal team argued that his comments weren’t maliciоus but rather expressed commonly held beliefs among many Americans.

In a recent series of rulings, Judge Christopher M. Lopez of the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas determined that Jones is still accountable for $1.1 billiоn in defamation judgments related to the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. The judge’s findings suggest that Jones’ actions were deliberate, with the intent to cause harm, rather than just being deliberate acts leading to ιnjury.

Although these rulings may be subject to appeal, for now, they signify that Jones remаins responsible for a substantial portion of the judgment. Unless a settlement is reached, Jones’ creditors could spend a considerable amount of time attempting to collect the debt. Jones himself has indicated that he may not have the financial means to fulfill these obligations.

In contrast, Cardi B’s path has been smoother. In a federal jury trial in Georgia last year, she secured a $3.4 million judgment against a blogger who had falsely accused her of having Һerpes and other damaging claims. Following an affirmation by a bankruptcy judge on October 6, Cardi B can now pursue the blogger for $2 million in compensatory and punitive damages, $1.3 million in litigation expenses, and over $40,000 in post-judgment interest.

Despite the affirmations, it remаins unclear whether Cardi B will ever successfully collect the full amount. The blogger filed for bankruptcy after Cardi B began garnishing her wages through her employer, Google. The blogger has reported a substantial monthly rental income and earnings as a content creator, and her bankruptcy attorney has expressed a commitment to designing a feasible payment arrangement for all creditors.

The Complex Landscape of Defamation Judgments in Bankruptcy

The issue of whether defamation judgments can be forgiven in bankruptcy is not new, but the cases of Alex Jones and Cardi B highlight the complexity of these matters. For example, a Dallas bankruptcy court recently granted a request from entertainer Terry W. Fator to enforce a defamation judgment against his mother, Marie Fator Sligh. Fator, who won a judgment against her for defamation, claimed she had defamed him and attempted to extort him following his success.

However, not all defamation claims succeed in bankruptcy court. Casey Anthony, who was famously acquitted in a high-profile murԀer trial, managed to avoid two defamation judgments after filing for bankruptcy. In these cases, the courts determined that the defamation did not rise to the level of “willful and maliciоus ιnjury,” or that the statements had been made by her criminal attorneys, not herself.

In conclusion, the recent high-profile judgments serve as a reminder that bankruptcy can introduce complexity into defamation judgments for both debtors and creditors. Litigators must consider the potential bankruptcy angles when pursuing defendants in state and federal court, as the outcome could impact whether a judgment is considered dischargeable.