Laura Loomer’s defamation lawsuit against HBO and Bill Maher over a joke he told on an episode of Real Time With Bill Maher was tossed out by a Florida judge on Wednesday who granted summary judgment to the defendants because his comments were nothing more than a “well-known comedian…making a joke.”

The dispute arose from the September 13, 2024 episode of Real Time, in which Maher made the following joke about Loomer and President Donald Trump:

I think maybe Laura Loomer’s in an arranged relationship to affect the election because she’s very close to Trump. She’s 31, looks like his type. We did an editorial here a few years ago…it was basically, who’s Trump f*cking? Because I said, you know, it’s not nobody. He’s been a dog for too long, and it’s not Melania. I think we may have our answer this week. I think it might be Laura Loomer.

In her complaint, Loomer argued that this was Maher “mak[ing] the false statement that Ms. Loomer is in a sexual relationship with Donald Trump, who is a married man” and thereby “falsely and maliciously accused Ms. Loomer of having committed adultery with Donald Trump.”

After some initial pleadings and motions, the defendants moved for summary judgment. In an 18-page order, Judge James S. Moody Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, a Clinton appointee and the father of Sen. Ashley Moody (R-FL), reviewed the facts behind Maher’s comment and news reports leading up to the Real Time episode, and ruled in the defendants’ favor.

As the judge noted, Loomer readily admitted that she not only has a well-established history as a controversial and outspoken political figure, but that she has a long-running “close relationship” with the president, has frequently visited him at Mar-a-Lago or his other properties, has traveled with him on Air Force One, and attended other events as his guest, Moody’s opinion mentioned several of Loomer’s social media posts, including a video she posted where Trump says “I love this girl,” a post that she captioned “Best president ever. I love him so much,” another post with “a picture of her standing beside President Trump, looking up at him, captioned simply with the ‘heart- eyes’ emoji,” and so on.

“Plaintiff’s frequent presence at President Trump’s side led to extensive chattering about the nature of their relationship in the days leading up to the [Real Time] Episode,” wrote Moody. “Twitter was abuzz with speculation that Plaintiff and President Trump might be in a relationship…News outlets also reported on the rumors swirling around Plaintiff’s relationship with and influence over President Trump.”

“With respect to the September 13, 2024, Episode, it is undisputed that the Real Time team was influenced by the chatter about Plaintiff and President Trump,” the judge added.

“It is undisputed that HBO and Maher refused to retract the statements about Loomer,” he continued, but “the record is undisputed that Maher, a well-known comedian, was making a joke based on the media frenzy surrounding Loomer and President Trump.”

Moody cited several other past defamation claims that were dismissed because the allegedly defamatory statements were jokes by “well-known comedians” in a “context” that meant the statements were “protected jokes.”

“Here, based on the full context of the Episode and the series, as to which there is no dispute of material fact, a reasonable Real Time viewer would have understood Maher was making a joke, and not a statement of fact about Plaintiff and President Trump,” he wrote, highlighting how this part of the show “was punctuated with laughter and applause throughout.”

After rejecting Loomer’s arguments that the defendants had acted with malice (a necessary element since she is a public figure), the judge declared that she had also failed to establish she suffered any damages:

Plaintiff has not identified a single individual who believed that she was sleeping with President Trump because of the Episode or a single relationship that was damaged as a result of the Episode. She has not offered any expert testimony quantifying her reputational harm. She has not introduced income statements or tax records from the year of the Episode or after to prove a decline in her income. The record reflects that, to the contrary, Loomer testified that her income increased in 2024 compared to prior years and that she continues to speak to and meet with President Trump, he continues to solicit her opinions, and she continues to receive invitations to the White House. Plaintiff’s remaining evidence of alleged damages associated with lost job opportunities is entirely speculative. Indeed, the record reflects that, prior to the Episode, Plaintiff failed to obtain certain jobs because of her public remarks about controversial topics.

The judge entered a final judgment in favor of the defendants HBO and Maher and against Loomer on all claims and directed the clerk of the court to close the case.

Loomer can appeal this ruling, although she will have challenges because appellate courts grant deference to the trial court on certain matters, and Moody issued a detailed opinion finding she had failed to establish any of the necessary elements for a defamation claim.

Unsurprisingly, Loomer was defiant in a statement she posted to social media after the ruling, calling the judge’s ruling “both factually and legally wrong,” “totally dishonest and misogynistic,” and “truly an attack on women and the truth.”

What Maher said about her “was no joke,” Loomer insisted, “and even if it was, it was legally actionable and has led to continued defamation, threats and misogynistic and unwanted sexual comments to be made towards me,” and “is also very disrespectful and defamatory of President Trump and [Melania Trump], both of whom I respect greatly.”

“This judgement should be reversed on appeal either at the Eleventh Circuit and at the Supreme Court if necessary,” she wrote.

New: The Mediaite One-Sheet "Newsletter of Newsletters"
Your daily summary and analysis of what the many, many media newsletters are saying and reporting. Subscribe now!