One person wrote, "Why is Lizzo allowed outside? #Grammys," while another said, "Oh so we're still rocking with Lizzo.... #grammys."
A third person wrote, "I thought Lizzo got exposed for being mean? I guess nobody care about this in this industry... #GRAMMYs," while a fourth said, "Wasn’t she canceled? #Lizzo #GRAMMYs."
As OK! previously reported, Lizzo got into some hot water after three of her former dancers claimed they were abused, harassed and discriminated against while working for the 35-year-old musician and her Big Grrrl Big Touring Inc.
On Friday, February 2, Lizzo's request to toss the lawsuit was denied by a judge.
Judge Mark H. Epstein ruled in Los Angeles Superior Court that Lizzo's argument be dismissed under the anti-SLAPP statue, as it didn't fit the suit, even though parts did. The anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) statue allows defendants a way to quickly dismiss meritless lawsuits that threaten their First Amendment rights.
Epstein dismissed a few allegations, including one of the dancers being fat-shamed, a nude photo shoot and dancers being forced to be on "hold" while not on tour.
- Fans Drag 'West Side Story' Star Rachel Zegler For Dramatic Reading 'Making Fun' Of Britney Spears' Trauma, Supporting Ansel Elgort
- Zoë Kravitz Comes Under Fire For Inappropriate Jaden Smith Comments In Shocking Resurfaced Interview After Slamming Will Smith Oscars Slap
- Lizzo 'Feels Under Attack' After Her Ex-Dancers Accused Her of Sexual Harassment: Singer Feels Like They’re 'Out to Ruin Her Reputation'
"This case presents a number of difficult issues," Epstein shared. "And the courts are rightfully wary of injecting themselves into the creative process. Finding the right balance is often no easy task, and this case is a perfect example."
“However, all the other claims remain, including sexual, religious and racial discrimination, sexual harassment, the demeaning visits to the Bananenbar in Amsterdam and Crazy Horse in Paris, false imprisonment, and assault. The ruling also rightfully signals that Lizzo — or any celebrity — is not insulated from this sort of reprehensible conduct merely because she is famous. We now look forward to conducting discovery and preparing the case for trial," Epstein wrote.
“It is dangerous for the court to weigh in, ham-fisted, into constitutionally protected activity,” Epstein continued. “But 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.”
Never miss a story — sign up for the OK! newsletter to stay up-to-date on the best of what OK! has to offer. It’s gossip too good to wait for!
In response, Stefan Friedman, whose a spokesperson for Lizzo, said: "Lizzo is grateful to the judge for seeing through much of the noise and recognizing who she is — a strong woman who exists to lift others up and spread positivity. We plan to appeal all elements that the judge chose to keep in the lawsuit and are confident we will prevail."