Since before he was even elected, critics have complained about President Donald Trump’s Twitter habits. Even First Lady Melania Trump admitted, while still on the campaign trail, she wasn’t a fan of the tweeting.

One former covert operative, outed CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson, even tried to crowd-fund a plan to buy Twitter outright — or at least, enough shares for a controlling interest — and then leverage that ownership power to ban President Trump from the platform.

Republican strategist Cheryl Jacobus, who claims Trump sent a mob of angry Twitter followers to harass her, took things a step further: She sued for defamation, demanding $4 million in damages.

But Jacobus got bad news Tuesday — a panel of five judges in a New York appeals court upheld the decision of the lower court. The Daily Caller News Foundation reported:

A five-judge panel reached the verdict Tuesday in Manhattan, agreeing with New York Judge Barbara Jaffe who defended Trump’s “intemperate tweets” as protected by the First Amendment, despite chastising them as intending to “belittle and demean.”

The appeals court wrote that Trump’s tweets were “too vague, subjective and lacking precise meaning” to qualify as defamatory and were protected speech.

According to the Hollywood Reporter, the tweets that sparked the lawsuit came after Jacobus criticized the Trump campaign on CNN: “One Trump tweet stated Jacobus ‘begged us for a job. We said no and she went hostile.’ A second Trump tweet stated, ‘Turned her down twice and she went hostile. Major loser, zero credibility.’”

h/tijr