My concern, and that of some others, is that there really were no straws in his most recent public comments to break the camel's back. (Conceding that if there were some new DMs, those haven't been made public). If his disagreement with a favored forum member's flippant tossing about of the "pro-life" label is enough to warrant a ban for prior behavior that did not result in a ban, it is difficult to escape the notion the ban was imposed because @motel rooms simply disagreed with someone on this site.
It's like putting someone in jail for a parking ticket because that person was accused of robbery in the past.
The user, it appears here, had a troubled history on this site. I suspect many of the heated exchanges he was in were going in both directions (I know some were, have seen them), but he may have gone too far on other occasions. Fine, sanction him them, for that behavior.
If the ban comes later and is really due to the content of his latest posts, that is crap. Regardless of how likeable or dislikeable he was. At a minimum, if the mods have a list of pet users whose comments cannot be disagreed with, they should make that list public so everyone can be guided by it. There should be some process, regardless of whether we all like or dislike whoever is being banned. And there has not been much transparency on the back end, aside from a generalized statement that all sorts of factors were taken into account (which again raises the question, why are those factors relevant now, all of a sudden).
No one has shared any recent comment by @motel rooms that is ban-worthy, or even all that offensive. There may be more to this story, but it hasn't been shared with the forum.