Clicky

Defend free speech and individual liberty online. 

Push back against Big Tech and media gatekeepers.

DC Court of Appeals will hear Laura Loomer and Freedom Watch’s big tech anti-conservative bias lawsuit

The appeals court has agreed to hear the merits of the case which accuses Apple, Facebook, Google, and Twitter of working together to “intentionally and willfully suppress politically conservative content.”

If you’re tired of censorship and surveillance, join Reclaim The Net.

In March, conservative commentator and congressional candidate Laura Loomer and conservative non-profit Freedom Watch had their big tech anti-conservative bias lawsuit dismissed by a court. Now a District of Columbia (DC) Court of Appeals has agreed to hear the merits of this lawsuit.

The lawsuit accuses Apple, Facebook, Google, and Twitter of working together to “intentionally and willfully suppress politically conservative content.” It also alleges that the tech giants have breached the Sherman Act (an anti-monopoly law), DC’s public accommodation law (prohibits acts performed wholly or partially for a discriminatory reason: “To deny, directly or indirectly, any person the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation…”), and the First Amendment. Additionally, the suit claims that being banned from some of these social media platforms caused Loomer “to suffer severe financial injury.”

Apple, Facebook, Google, and Twitter were seeking a quick ruling and a motion of “summary affirmance” of dismissal from the DC Court of Appeals – a ruling where the court concludes that the case is weak and it would be a waste of time to hear. However, the DC Court of Appeals has denied this motion and said that it will hear the merits of this suit:

“Upon consideration of the motion for summary affirmance, the oppositions thereto, and the replies, it is ORDERED that the motion for summary affirmance be denied. The merits of the parties’ positions are not so clear as to warrant summary action. Taxpayers Watchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (per curiam). It is FURTHER ORDERED that the Appellees be limited to one joint brief, not to exceed 13,000 words. See Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(7). Because the court has determined that summary disposition is not in order, the Clerk is instructed to enter a briefing schedule and to calendar this case for presentation to a merits panel.”

This lawsuit is the latest in a series of recent suits that have been filed against big tech companies by politicians and political commentators. Last month, 2020 presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard sued Google for election interference. Loomer also filed a separate defamation lawsuit against Facebook in July after the company called her a “dangerous individual.”

If you’re tired of censorship and surveillance, join Reclaim The Net.

Reclaim The Net Logo

Defend free speech and individual liberty online. 

Push back against Big Tech and media gatekeepers.

Share this post

🔓 Join the free speech thinkers, privacy advocates, and independent voices who rely on Reclaim The Net to stay ahead of censorship and Big Tech overreach — every day.

How to

✓ Features and tutorials on how to avoid Big Tech censorship and host content for yourselves and others

Explore

✓ Exclusive insights on censorship, free speech, and digital privacy in a surveillance age

Expert knowledge

✓ Stay informed on antitrust, policy shifts, and your digital rights

Discounts

✓ Up-to 50% off merchandise, with new items added regularly

Help the cause

✓ Defend free speech and digital civil liberties—stand against censorship

Already a member? Login here.