Social media occupies a strange space where free speech as a guiding principle should craft a general framework, but private firms themselves cannot face government regulation for infringing upon it. Such is the paradox Twitter finds itself in with their relatively illogical ban of professional idiot Laura Loomer.

Loomer is a hack and a grifter masquerading as a journalist. She is a Jew who cavorted with neo-Nazis Richard Spencer and Baked Alaska and has called this writer "Hitler." There is no love lost between myself and this racist clown.

That said, the line for banning someone from an open platform should be clear and consistent. News organizations are liable for the content they publish because they are specifically publishers. Open platforms are not. But if the likes of Facebook and Twitter are moving into the business of publishing, choosing which content creators they will ban and which they will lend platforms, then they should lawyer up and get ready to be taken to court.

That's because they can't paint themselves as objective technologists while acting like publishers. Twitter's explicit terms of service claim that, outside of obvious bot accounts or engaging in illegal behaviors, they shut down only those engaging in "abusive behavior," such as inciting targeted harassment. It's a broad statute, but one that seems to serve an obvious purpose.

While many of Loomer's tweets on the platform have been abhorrent, the tweet she got banned for was more or less benign. The tweet in question attacks Twitter's choice of newly elected Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., on a celebratory list.

"Ilhan is pro Sharia Ilhan is pro- FGM Under Sharia homosexuals are oppressed & killed. Women are abused & forced to wear the hijab. Ilhan is anti Jewish," Loomer's tweet reads.

I can't speak to whether the newly elected congresswoman is pro-Sharia. That's a hefty claim for anyone to make, and Loomer is the last person who should be trusted in making it. But Loomer is not wrong that Omar has openly spread the anti-Semitic conspiracy theory that Jewish Zionists posses hypnotic powers. Nor is she wrong that Sharia law is inherently homophobic and sexist.

I cannot and will not speak to the purity of Loomer's intentions. She's a hack, and she's said far worse things than this. But this tweet isn't grounds for banning anyone from Twitter.

I've seen Loomer harass people and share legally questionable content in the past. But this tweet hardly seems like grounds for a ban — unless Twitter is a publisher, choosing opinion content and therefore liable for everything it allows on its website.