Laura Loomer "Cannot Provide Any Facts" About Twitter Ban Conspiracy

Anyone who regularly trawls through court records knows that reading legal documents is typically kind of a slog. But every now and then, an indignant lawyer or exasperated judge blesses us with page-turning material that's basically a hilariously formal clapback.

That's certainly the case in the latest filing in a lawsuit brought forth by Laura Loomer, a far-right, anti-immigrant conspiracy theorist known for making Islamophobic remarks. After Loomer was banned from Twitter in 2018, she and her company, Illoominate Media, filed a court case against Florida's chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), claiming the Muslim advocacy organization conspired with Twitter to have her removed from the site.

A federal judge dismissed the case last year, finding Loomer offered no proof of those allegations. Now, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has tossed her appeal, too.

The court's decision is essentially a 12-page rejection of everything Loomer has said about CAIR and Twitter.

"For starters, Loomer and Illoominate offer nothing beyond vague speculation to indicate that CAIR-Florida was involved in the alleged conspiracy," the three-judge panel wrote. "...Loomer and Illoominate admit they cannot provide any facts showing that CAIR-Florida was involved in the ban of Loomer's account, and instead offer only speculation."

According to court documents, the notion that CAIR was involved in Loomer's Twitter ban was nothing more than a rumor started by Nathan Bernard, a dude who regularly trolls far-right figures on Twitter. As part of the case, Bernard submitted an affidavit saying the rumor was a prank.

While Loomer and her attorneys tried to argue in court that she had a right to keep a Twitter account, the appellate judges found that laughable.

"Twitter's Terms of Service, which the plaintiffs do not dispute, allow Twitter to ban Loomer from its platform for any reason at all," the panel wrote. "[...] Loomer did not have legal or contractual rights in the continued use of her account."

The judges pretty much concluded that Loomer wasted their time by filing the appeal: "The plaintiffs think the district court applied the wrong standard, but that's just not so."

In a press release, CAIR said it will ask Loomer to pay its court costs and attorney fees.

"The Court confirmed what we already knew, that Loomer's lawsuit was completely meritless," said Justin Sadowsky, one of the group's attorneys. "The case is over. All that is left now is for CAIR to recoup its legal fees as it is entitled to do under Florida law."

Although Loomer's lawyers claimed the Twitter ban was interfering with her business, the 27-year-old internet personality has built a brand for herself as "the most banned woman in the world." This year, she mounted a bid against U.S. Rep. Lois Frankel, a Democrat, in Florida's District 21 but lost with only 39 percent of the vote.