Megan Thee Stallion was denied a permanent injunction against blogger Milagro Cooper in her cyberstalking case, even after securing damages at trial.
According to newly surfaced court documents, a federal judge turned down Megan’s request for a lasting cyberstalking injunction to stop Cooper from continuing the alleged harassment, calling the request “overbroad.”
Back in November, the 31-year-old rapper won her civil lawsuit against Cooper, with a jury finding the blogger liable for defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and promoting an altered sexual deepfake video. As previously reported, Megan was awarded $75,000 in damages in December.
However, the judge later ruled that the jury’s decision didn’t automatically meet Florida’s strict legal standard for cyberstalking. Under the law, cyberstalking must involve actions that are “willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly” carried out, and that serve “no legitimate purpose.”
In this case, the jury concluded that Cooper acted “intentionally or recklessly,” which left uncertainty around whether her actions met the legal requirement for malicious intent. They also found that Cooper operated similarly to traditional media, meaning her commentary could be seen as having a “legitimate purpose” under Florida’s broad definitions.
Megan had also asked the court to bar Cooper from speaking about her mental health, alcohol use, or extended family, but the judge rejected that request, noting that Florida law doesn’t allow injunctions simply “to stop someone from uttering insults or falsehoods.”
She further requested that Cooper be ordered to stay between 500 and 1,000 feet away from her, but the judge found no basis for that, pointing out that the alleged harassment was entirely online and there was no evidence Cooper ever tried to approach her physically, contact her directly, or attend her shows.
The court ultimately ruled that financial compensation was sufficient. Alongside the damages already awarded, the judge highlighted that Megan can still pursue attorney’s fees, which serves as a deterrent moving forward.
The judge also dismissed claims of an ongoing or immediate threat, noting that the original posts and platforms involved are now “defunct,” “deleted,” and “inaccessible.”
Lastly, the ruling raised First Amendment concerns, stating that granting such a broad injunction would amount to an unconstitutional “prior restraint,” essentially punishing Cooper for potential future speech before it happens or is proven defamatory.
In 2024, Megan filed the lawsuit accusing Cooper of running a “campaign of harassment.” In her complaint, she described the blogger as a “mouthpiece” for Tory Lanez, alleging that Cooper caused emotional distress by sharing a deepfake pornographic video, questioning whether Lanez actually shot her, and engaging in cyberstalking.
