Right-wing activist's lawsuit targeting Bill Maher for joke thrown out

A federal judge in Florida has thrown out far-right MAGA activist Laura Loomer's lawsuit against late-night comedian Bill Maher.

Loomer, a so-called "Trump whisperer" whose advice has resulted in a number of Trump administration officials getting fired, was enraged about Maher's insinuation that she and the president were involved in a romantic affair — something that many conspiracy theorists have speculated about, but that she has categorically denied.

"I think maybe Laura Loomer’s in an arranged relationship to affect the election because she’s very close to Trump," said Maher during the offending segment. "She’s 31, looks like his type. We did an editorial here a few years ago…it was basically, who’s Trump [expletive]? 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."

Loomer has claimed that this joke caused reputational harm and prevented her from finding employment. However, Senior U.S. District Judge James Moody, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, noted she failed to find any evidence of this.

"As Defendants contend, 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," wrote Moody. "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," noted Moody. "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."