Not that his collection of wristwatches was any big deal, despite the media calling it a collection of luxury watches. but whatever they were, they were supposed to be handed over last week, per the order of Southern District of New York Judge Lewis Liman. They weren’t.

“What can be delivered right now?” Judge Lewis J. Liman asked, after peppering lawyers for Mr. Giuliani, the former mayor of New York City, with questions about some of his most prized possessions, among them a signed Joe DiMaggio jersey; 26 designer watches; and a vintage Mercedes-Benz.

Those items, and more, were supposed to be handed over last week to begin paying off a $148 million judgment to two former Georgia election workers whom Mr. Giuliani had defamed. The deadline came and went, and still nothing was turned over.

And if the failure to abide the order wasn’t bad enough, Rudy showed up to vote in what once was Lauren Bacall’s 1980 SL500, as big a “fuck you” as a car can give. How did Judge Liman take the insult?

On Thursday, the judge set the latest “final” deadline, brushing aside repeated arguments that the possessions should remain with Mr. Giuliani while the case was under appeal. By the end of next week, he said, Mr. Giuliani had to either hand over all the items, or he could face civil contempt, a charge that could carry severe penalties, including possible jail time.

The public operates under a misconception that when a judge orders a litigant to do something, it somehow magically happens. Some litigants comply. Some do not. Rudy falls into the latter category because he’s … Rudy. But you would think Judge Liman would know better.

Mr. Giuliani has claimed that he doesn’t recall what is in storage, and efforts to get a full inventory from the Long Island facility owner have not been successful, the lawyers said.

“We’ve asked over and over where the stuff is,” Aaron Nathan, a lawyer for the two women, said.

“The notion that your client doesn’t have any knowledge of where his assets are located is farcical,” Judge Liman said, addressing Mr. Giuliani’s lawyers.

Is it unfair to Rudy that he would be required to turn over his possessions before his appeal was decided?

His lawyer argued that forcing his client to surrender a watch given to him by his grandfather was “vindictive.”

“Oh, come on, that’s ridiculous,” the judge said, his voice rising. “Bodega owners have family heirlooms,” he said, referring to another case he has presided over — “and if they have a debt, they have to pay the debt.”

He added, “The law is the law.”

According to Rudy, this case was nothing more than a political vendetta, which gives him the moral right to not comply with the order of the court. Then again, Rudy doesn’t get a vote as to whether he’s constrained to comply with Judge Liman’s order. That’s entirely up to the court, which has now, in the judge’s obvious annoyance, announced that Giuliani’s failure to comply with the last order means he’s issued a new order, and this time it’s double-really final. Or else.

It happens with surprising regularity that litigants blow off time constraints imposed by judges, largely because if they don’t comply as ordered, the worst that will happen is they will get a new date upon which they have to comply. In other words, there is no downside to ignoring the court.

Judges really need to give some serious thought as to whether they want their orders to be taken seriously or treated like polite suggestions, to be taken or not as the litigant chooses. If the point of a court order is to compel a litigant to do something, then judges need to back them up with real sanctions for failure to comply. If not, then judges shouldn’t be surprised that litigants ignore their orders and drive around in a “fuck you” Mercedes.