{"id":6256,"date":"2025-06-03T17:25:55","date_gmt":"2025-06-03T17:25:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/lizzo-says-lawsuit-is-attack-on-her-free-speech-rights-in-new-appeal\/"},"modified":"2025-06-03T17:25:55","modified_gmt":"2025-06-03T17:25:55","slug":"lizzo-says-lawsuit-is-attack-on-her-free-speech-rights-in-new-appeal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/lizzo-says-lawsuit-is-attack-on-her-free-speech-rights-in-new-appeal\/","title":{"rendered":"Lizzo Says Lawsuit Is Attack on Her Free Speech Rights In New Appeal"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n

\n\tLizzo<\/a> is launching an appeal aimed at ending a sexual harassment lawsuit filed by her former backup dancers, calling it an \u201cattack\u201d on her \u201cFirst Amendment right to perform her music and advocate for body positivity.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tThe blockbuster case, filed in 2023, accuses the star (Melissa Jefferson<\/strong>) of sexual harassment and discrimination. Though a judge dismissed some claims last year \u2013 including a headline-grabbing claim about fat-shaming \u2013 he allowed the overall lawsuit to move ahead toward a jury trial.<\/p>\n

\n\tIn an opening brief filed last month, her attorneys urged an appeals court overturn that ruling and toss out the entire case. They say Lizzo\u2019s behavior toward the dancers was clearly part of her artistic approach \u2014 and thus shielded by constitutional protections for free speech.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cPlaintiffs\u2019 suit [is] an attack on Lizzo\u2019s First Amendment right to perform her music and advocate for body positivity,\u201d writes Lizzo\u2019s attorneys, who include prominent Hollywood defense attorney Marty Singer. \u201cRather than accept personal accountability, plaintiffs filed this shotgun action, taking aim at nearly every facet of Lizzo\u2019s creative process.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tOne key claim in the case against Lizzo is that she pushed the dancers to attend a sex show in Amsterdam\u2019s Red Light District at a venue called Bananenbar, then pressured them to touch and engage with nude performers. But her lawyers say that incident \u2013 which they stress was entirely optional \u2014 was directly tied to the creation of her art and thus cannot form the basis of legal liablity.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cThere\u2019s no disagreement that Lizzo held these outings as a necessary part of her creative process,\u201d Singer writes. \u201cEarly social gatherings during international tours (like the Bananenbar) are critical to teambuilding and fostering cohesion.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tThe case against Lizzo, filed by Arianna Davis<\/strong>, Crystal Williams<\/strong> and Noelle Rodriguez<\/strong>, accused the singer and her Big Grrrl Big Touring Inc. of creating a hostile work environment via sexual harassment, religious and racial discrimination. It also accused her of disability discrimination based on weight-shaming \u2013 a loaded allegation against a star who had made body positivity a key part of her personal brand.<\/p>\n

\n\tLizzo quickly denied any wrongdoing, calling the claims \u201cfalse\u201d and \u201csensationalized\u201d and vowing to fight back: \u201cI am very open with my sexuality and expressing myself but I cannot accept or allow people to use that openness to make me out to be something I am not.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tThe star\u2019s legal defense centered on California\u2019s so-called anti-SLAPP law \u2014 a special statute that makes it easier to quickly end lawsuits that threaten free speech. In seeking to dismiss the case under that law, Lizzo\u2019s lawyers argued the dancers wanted to \u201csilence\u201d Lizzo and \u201cweaponize\u201d her creative expression against her.<\/p>\n

\n\tIn early 2024, Judge Mark H. Epstein<\/strong> partly endorsed that argument and tossed out several allegations, including the discrimination claims about fat-shaming. But he allowed numerous accusations to move ahead toward a potential trial, including those over the Amsterdam sex show.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cIt is dangerous for the court to weigh in, ham-fisted, into constitutionally protected activity,\u201d the judge wrote. \u201cBut it is equally dangerous to turn a blind eye to allegations of discrimination or other forms of misconduct merely because they take place in a speech-related environment.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tIn appealing that ruling, Lizzo\u2019s lawyers argue that it\u2019s dangerous for judges to wade into an artist\u2019s creative process. They cite earlier court rulings that say such work includes discussion of \u201cmany bizarre and potentially offensive ideas\u201d and can be \u201cunpredictable.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cJudges must not dissect the creative process to determine what was necessary to achieve the final product and what was not,\u201d Lizzo\u2019s lawyers write. \u201cBy rejecting the artist\u2019s proven experience for what is necessary to, and best enhances, her own art, the trial court stepped far outside its role.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tIn a response statement to Billboard<\/em>, Ron Zambrano \u2014 lead counsel for Davis, Williams and Rodriguez \u2014 said he and his clients \u201cstand by the claims in the lawsuit and look forward to proving everything in court.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cLizzo has been trying and failing repeatedly to get this case dismissed because she does not want to face a jury of her peers explaining how she created such an egregious and unlawful work environment for our clients,\u201d Zambrano said.<\/p>\n

\n\tAttorneys for the plaintiffs will file their own appellate brief later this month aimed at rebutting Lizzo\u2019s arguments. The two sides will then argue the case before the court at some point in the coming months. If the appeals court sides with Lizzo, the case will be dismissed. If the court sides with Davis, Williams and Rodriguez, the case will return to Epstein\u2019s court and move toward an eventual jury trial.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Lizzo is launching an appeal aimed at ending a sexual harassment lawsuit filed by her former backup dancers, calling it an \u201cattack\u201d on her \u201cFirst Amendment right to […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":6257,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[366,1583,221,303,6173,408,820],"class_list":["post-6256","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-lawyers","tag-appeal","tag-attack","tag-free","tag-lawsuit","tag-lizzo","tag-rights","tag-speech"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6256","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6256"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6256\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/6257"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6256"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6256"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/usatrustedlawyers.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6256"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}