Megan Thee Stallion’s Defamation Victory Against Blogger Milagro Gramz Reinstated by Federal Judge
A federal judge has reinstated a defamation judgment in favor of Megan Thee Stallion, reviving a jury verdict that found blogger Milagro Gramz liable for spreading false claims about the rapper while allegedly working in coordination with the family of imprisoned rapper Tory Lanez.
The ruling marks the latest development in the long-running fallout from the 2020 shooting case involving Lanez, whose legal name is Daystar Peterson. In 2023, Lanez was sentenced to 10 years in prison after being convicted of shooting Megan in both feet following an argument in Los Angeles. Since then, public disputes surrounding the case have continued across social media, podcasts, and independent media platforms, often reigniting debates about the trial and Megan’s credibility.
In a decision issued Friday, Chief U.S. District Judge Cecilia Altonaga reversed an earlier ruling that had temporarily set aside Megan’s defamation award against blogger Milagro Cooper, known online as Milagro Gramz. The judgment had previously been vacated because the court determined Cooper qualified as a media defendant, which under Florida law would have required Megan to provide advance notice before filing her lawsuit.
After reviewing the trial record, however, Judge Altonaga concluded that the circumstances surrounding the three defamatory statements at the center of the case were different.
According to the ruling, evidence presented during the trial showed that Cooper was not acting independently when making the statements. Instead, the judge found that she had been working in coordination with Lanez’s father, Sonstar Peterson, and others connected to the rapper’s defense efforts. The court determined that Cooper received payments from members of the Peterson family, obtained information before it became publicly available, and communicated with individuals involved in Lanez’s legal strategy.
Because of that relationship, the judge concluded Cooper was effectively acting on behalf of the Peterson family when publishing the statements that the jury later determined were defamatory.
“The trial record shows that defendant was commissioned by the Petersons to publish or broadcast the three defamatory statements,” Judge Altonaga wrote in her ruling. As a result, the court found that Cooper was not entitled to the legal protections typically afforded to independent media defendants in this instance.
The original verdict awarded Megan a total of $75,000 in damages. Jurors awarded $15,000 for defamation, $8,000 for emotional distress, and $50,000 related to Cooper’s role in amplifying a sexually explicit deepfake video depicting the rapper. The jury also awarded an additional $2,000 in punitive damages.
Following the ruling, Megan welcomed the judge’s decision in a statement: “Today’s ruling is a reminder that the truth matters and ultimately prevails,” she said. “I’m truly grateful for the judge’s thoughtful and thorough consideration in reinstating the jury’s defamation verdict and holding the defendant fully accountable for all of her actions.”
The lawsuit, originally filed in October 2024, accused Cooper of acting as a “mouthpiece” for Lanez and helping spread false claims about Megan in the aftermath of the criminal trial. Among the allegations were accusations that Megan had lied under oath, fabricated aspects of the shooting, and suffered from alcoholism and mental instability.
The case also focused heavily on a manipulated deepfake video that falsely depicted Megan engaging in sexual acts. While Megan never alleged that Cooper created the video, she argued that the blogger knowingly amplified its reach by directing followers toward it on social media.
During the civil trial in Miami, Megan testified about the emotional impact of seeing the altered content spread online. Jurors ultimately agreed that Cooper’s actions contributed to the video’s circulation and caused emotional harm to the rapper.
The ruling represents another legal setback for Lanez’s supporters, many of whom have continued publicly challenging the outcome of the criminal case despite his conviction. For Megan, meanwhile, the reinstated judgment closes another chapter in a years-long legal and public battle that has extended far beyond the original shooting incident and into the online campaigns that followed.
Friday’s decision restores the full jury verdict and reaffirms the court’s conclusion that the statements in question crossed the line from commentary into defamation.
