In a surprising legal twist following a jury’s favorable verdict for Megan Thee Stallion, a federal judge has dismissed the defamation count against blogger Milagro Cooper (known online as Milagro Gramz).
While Megan ultimately secured a win on other claims related to intentional infliction of emotional distress and the promotion of a deepfake video, the dismissal of the defamation charge highlights a crucial, and often complex, issue in the digital age: the classification of online commentators under media shield laws.
“We’re thankful for the jury’s commitment to reinforcing the importance of truth, accountability and responsible commentary on social media,” the plaintiff’s attorney Mari Henderson said in a statement.
Lawsuit accused Cooper of coordinated online campaign
The lawsuit, filed by Megan Thee Stallion (legal name Megan Pete) in October 2024, accused the blogger of engaging in a coordinated online campaign of harassment and misinformation following the 2020 shooting incident involving rapper Tory Lanez.
“As a condition precedent to a defamation suit, section 770.01, Florida Statutes, requires a plaintiff to serve a media defendant with written notice specifying the alleged false or defamatory statements at least five days before filing a complaint,” Chief U.S. District Judge Cecilia Altonaga stated in her final judgment.
The jury had initially found Cooper liable on all three counts—defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and promoting an altered sexual depiction—and awarded $75,000 in damages.
However, the post-trial legal maneuvering centered on the jury’s finding that Cooper should be treated as a “media defendant.” Under Florida law, if a defendant is classified as a media entity, the plaintiff must provide a formal notification—a “notice before suit”—prior to filing a defamation lawsuit.
Because Megan Thee Stallion’s legal team did not issue this notice, U.S. District Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga ruled that the defamation claim could not stand and was subsequently dismissed.
Megan Thee Stallion says case led her to seek extensive therapy
This decision reduced the overall damages awarded to the rapper from the jury’s initial $75,000 to $59,000. Crucially, though, the dismissal of the defamation claim does not vacate the entire ruling.
The court upheld the jury’s findings that Cooper was liable for intentional infliction of emotional distress and for promoting an altered sexual depiction (the deepfake video).
Megan Thee Stallion testified that the years of online abuse, which included false claims that she lied under oath and the circulation of the explicit deepfake, caused her severe mental distress, leading her to seek extensive therapy.
While the defamation count’s dismissal may appear as a partial victory for the blogger and her defense team, the remaining liability for the deepfake video and emotional distress is significant.
Under Florida law, Cooper may also be responsible for covering Megan Thee Stallion’s considerable legal fees, which are anticipated to be substantial.
“Not only is Milagro being held accountable for paying Megan compensatory and punitive damages, but Florida’s fee-shifting legal provision will require her to cover costs of Megan’s legal bills on the deepfake claim. This verdict sends a clear message that spreading dangerous misinformation carries significant consequences,” Henderson said.
The dismissal of the defamation claim merely underscores the technical complexities of applying traditional libel laws to the rapidly evolving landscape of social media commentary and blogging. Megan has secured a definitive legal acknowledgment of the harm she endured, a crucial step in her long-fought battle against online harassment.