A federal judge on Wednesday threw out a defamation lawsuit filed by conservative activist Laura Loomer against HBO and talk show host Bill Maher, stemming from a joke Maher made in September 2024 about Loomer's relationship with President Trump.
District Judge James Moody Jr. granted summary judgment in favor of HBO and Maher, writing that “no reasonable” jury could conclude the defendants acted with malice. The decision marks a decisive win for free speech protections in political satire.
During a panel discussion on HBO's Real Time with Bill Maher, Maher quipped that Loomer was in an “arranged relationship to affect the election” because of her close proximity to Trump. He added, “She’s 31, looks like his type…I think it might be Laura Loomer.” The comments were met with a mix of laughter and groans from the audience.
Loomer argued that the remarks damaged her reputation and implied a sexual relationship, but she failed to provide evidence of financial loss, reputational harm, or any individual who believed the claims. The judge noted that after the episode aired, Loomer's White House invitations and public appearances alongside Trump appeared to increase.
In his ruling, Moody emphasized the context of the show: “Maher himself repeatedly testified that, in his mind, he was making a joke. The record reflects that comedians on late-night shows ‘make jokes’ about the headlines of the week and ‘don’t do investigations’ or break news.” He also pointed out that audience reactions, including groans, are typical responses to comedy.
Loomer reacted sharply on X, calling the ruling “dishonest” and “misogynistic.” She wrote, “It is beyond the pale for any judge to say that a woman can be accused of having sex with a man and have it be brushed off as ‘a joke’ just because she proclaimed a platonic love for their politics and leadership style.”
This case is not the first time a federal judge has dismissed a high-profile defamation suit involving political figures. A similar outcome occurred in a recent lawsuit against FBI Director Patel over a remark about nightclubs.
The ruling underscores the broad latitude courts grant to comedic speech, particularly when it targets public figures. Legal experts note that proving defamation requires demonstrating actual malice, a high bar under First Amendment precedent.
Loomer has not indicated whether she will appeal. Her lawyer did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
