University of St. Thomas Law Journal

The Barbz Are Very Mad at Megan, but Did They Really Break the Law? Rap Beef and Fan Behavior Under the RICO Act

Tess Register*

Friday, January 26th, 2024, was an unseasonably warm day in Minneapolis, Minnesota, perhaps due to the heat that rapper Megan Thee Stallion dropped on her latest single, Hiss. In this “warning to her haters,”1 Megan called out fake friends who had used proximity to her to amplify their own fame, rapping, “I just wanna kick this sh– off by sayin’ f— y’all … [e]very time I get mentioned, one of y’all … get twenty-four hours of attention.”2 She went on to criticize the hypocrisy of self-proclaimed feminists in the rap industry, such as Drake,3 who deride women that get plastic surgery, even as they covertly undergo their own cosmetic procedures.4 In another verse, she clapped back at everyone who accused her of lying when fellow rapper Tory Lanez shot her in the foot in 20205: “I’m the Teflon Don in the courtroom … [t]hey be throwin’ that dirt, don’t sh– stick.”6

What Happened?

However, two lines in particular struck a nerve with rap icon Nicki Minaj: “These h— don’t be mad at Megan, these h— mad at Megan’s Law.”7 Megan’s Law refers to a 1996 federal law and associated state legislation that require law enforcement officials to notify the public about registered sex offenders in their communities.8 Although Megan did not specify who these lyrics applied to, Nicki perceived the reference as an attack on her husband and brother,9 both of whom are convicted sex offenders, the latter for the assault of a child.10

For the next three days after Hiss was released, Nicki lashed out at Megan on social media, slut-shaming her, mocking her height, deriding the gunshot injury to her foot, and even insulting Megan’s deceased mother, Holly Thomas, who died of brain cancer in 2019.11 Nicki incorporated these insults into a diss track titled Big Foot, which listeners heavily criticized for falling below Minaj’s usual song quality, both in terms of craft and content.12 This, paired with Nicki’s “trash behavior” on social media,13 alienated many fans who have since “retired their Barb flag.”14

However, other members of Nicki’s fanbase, known colloquially as “the Barbz,”15 zealously defended the rapper online by targeting, harassing, and even doxing16 content creators who criticized Big Foot or Minaj’s behavior.17 “I am sorry. I am so sorry that I disrespected Nicki Minaj … please leave my family members out of it,” begged TikTok creator Bela Delgado after deleting a video that was critical of the rapper.18 Bela stated that they removed the post after fans had circulated their address and targeted members of their family on social media.19  

Online threats from the Barbz continued to escalate; anonymous accounts on X shared the information of the cemetery where Holly Thomas is buried and threatened to desecrate the gravesite.20 While many doxing victims have shared individual perpetrators’ URLs and IP addresses with law enforcement,21 some claim that any charges should reflect fans’ group efforts to suppress criticism of Nicki Minaj.22 Under this theory, the Barbz could be subject to criminal or civil penalties under the RICO Act.23

The RICO Act

The Racketeer Influence and Corrupt Organizations (“RICO”) Act24 was enacted as part of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970 to curb the proliferation of organized crime.25 The Act targeted organizations such as the Mafia, as well as local syndicates that had infiltrated and corrupted “lawful businesses, labor unions, and local politics,”26 by allowing prosecutors to charge members under one count—even those who “didn’t get their hands bloody in the crime,” but were still involved in the enterprise.27 In addition to enumerating acts that qualify as RICO crimes,28 the RICO Act also established a civil right of action.29 Similar to the coinciding development of state and federal iterations of Megan’s Law,30 thirty-three states have since passed their own versions of the RICO Act,31 which can be even more expansive than the already broad template provided by the federal statute.32

RICO violations have at least three parts: (1) an enterprise that engaged (2) in a pattern of racketeering activity (3) which defendants conducted or participated in.33 Depending on the type of RICO violation, the State or plaintiff may need to prove additional elements. For example, the federal statute requires that the conduct also affected interstate commerce, and civil claimants must show that they were injured by the underlying conduct.34  

RICO & the Barbz

  1. Enterprise

For RICO to apply to the Barbz, the fandom must first fit the definition of a RICO enterprise. Federal RICO defines enterprise as “any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity, and any union or group of individuals associated in fact although not a legal entity.”35 Courts have interpreted this definition broadly.36 Since the Barbz are not a union or formal legal entity, the fandom would likely be analyzed as an association-in-fact enterprise, which “is simply a continuing unit that functions with a common purpose.”37 In other words, organizations don’t need to have fixed structures or procedures to qualify as RICO enterprises.38 Rather, they need only have a purpose, relationships among their associates, and to exist long enough to pursue a pattern of racketeering activity in furtherance of their purpose.39

In this case, the Barbz are united by their shared purpose to admire, support, and defend Nicki Minaj.40 In pursuit of this goal, fans have formed close relationships and coordinated their efforts through various online platforms such as “Wiki Minaj,” a forum dedicated to “cover[ing] everything there is to know about rapper, songwriter and actress [sic] extraordinary Nicki Minaj.”41 As a unit, the Barbz also have a history of targeting individuals whom they perceive to be Nicki’s opponents.42 In sum, the Barbz have been functioning as a continuing unit with the requisite purpose and relationships to be considered a RICO enterprise. However, the question remains as to whether members’ conduct of online harassment and doxing constitutes a pattern of racketeering activity.

  1. Pattern of Racketeering Activity

RICO statutes list predicate acts, or crimes that provide a basis for an independent RICO charge, that qualify as racketeering activity. In the federal statute, covered conduct ranges from copyright infringement to trafficking in contraband cigarettes, and also encompasses “any act or threat” related to offenses like murder, kidnapping, gambling, arson, robbery, bribery, and extortion that constitute felonies under state law.43 Technically, a pattern consists of at least two predicate acts committed within ten years of each other.44 However, in practice, courts have found this minimum insufficient45 and some states—Minnesota included—have provided a more rigorous and specific statutory definition.46 

In addition to showing that the predicate acts occurred within the statutory period, a prosecutor or plaintiff must show that the acts were continuous and related enough “[to] produce a pattern.”47 Acts are continuous if they are likely to repeat, or if they have a history of doing so.48 Acts are related if they “have the same or similar purposes, results, participants, victims, or methods of commission, or otherwise are interrelated by distinguishing characteristics . . . .”49 Continuity and relatedness are both evaluated on a case-by-case basis.50 

Since 2018, the Barbz have engaged in at least four well-known online harassment and doxing campaigns, all aimed at silencing Nicki Minaj critics.51 For RICO purposes, these incidents are related. The same group of people (i.e., Nicki Minaj fans) used the same methods—doxing and threats via the internet—to target victims who, according to fans, possessed the shared trait of being certified Nicki Minaj haters, for the purpose of suppressing their opinions. There have been more than two documented incidents, all of which occurred well within ten years of each other; this history of repetition renders it continuous.  

So, the Barbzs’ conduct constitutes a pattern—but do the acts of doxing and harassment count as racketeering activity? They might. More specifically, threatening and doxing others until they remove their online content may qualify as a form of extortion. Someone commits extortion when they obtain another’s property, with that person’s consent, which they induce by “wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear . . . .”52 Although some courts have held that online harassment does not itself count as a RICO act,53 it remains to be seen whether such conduct could constitute extortion and fall under RICO that way. It is also unclear whether causing a creator to remove their content is the same as obtaining their property.

  1. Participation

What is clear, however, is that a member of a criminal enterprise doesn’t violate RICO unless they participate in the racketeering activity in some way, either directly or indirectly.54 In the fandom context, this means that Nicki fans who just really like her music, and who do not threaten or dox Minaj’s critics or direct others to do so, are not liable for other Barbzs’ bad behavior. And as for those other Barbz? While any pending cases could bring up some very interesting legal issues in the realm of RICO, it’s never okay to harm others on behalf of a celebrity. Also, Big Foot is really not worth it.

  1. Moises Mendez II, Megan Thee Stallion has a Warning for Her Haters on ‘Hiss’, Time (Jan. 26, 2024, 12:46 PM EDT), https://time.com/6589029/megan-thee-stallion-hiss-song-meaning/. ↩︎
  2. Megan Thee Stallion, Hiss (2024). ↩︎
  3. See Drake, On BS (OZ & Elyas, 2022) (“I blow half a million on you h—, I’m a feminist.”); see also Spencer Kornhaber, For Drake, the Misogyny Is the Message, The Atlantic (Nov. 9, 2022), https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2022/11/drake-megan-thee-stallion-her-loss-album/672023/. ↩︎
  4. Megan Thee Stallion, supra note 2 (rapping about individuals who “hate on BBLs and be walkin’ ‘round with the same scars.”). Fans overwhelmingly interpreted this as a reference to Drake, who allegedly received liposuction on his abdominal muscles. See Joe Price, Drake Shirtless Photo Leads to Speculation He’s Had Work Done on His Abs, Complex (Apr. 19, 2023), https://www.complex.com/music/a/backwoodsaltar/drake-shirtless-photo-abs. ↩︎
  5. Tory Lanez was convicted and sentenced to ten years in prison for the incident. Anastasia Tsioulcas & Chloe Veltman, Tory Lanez Sentenced to 10 Years for Megan Thee Stallion Shooting, NPR (Aug. 8, 2023, 8:03 PM EDT), https://www.npr.org/2023/08/08/1181702809/tory-lanez-megan-thee-stallion. ↩︎
  6. Megan Thee Stallion, supra note 2. ↩︎
  7. Megan Thee Stallion, supra note 2. ↩︎
  8. See Megan’s Law, Pub. L. 104-145, 110 Stat.1345 (1996); see also, e.g., Minn. Stat. § 243.166 subd. 2; Cal. Penal Code § 290.46. The law was named after seven-year-old Megan Kanka, who was raped and murdered by her neighbor, who had previously been convicted of child molestation. See Annys Shin, When Megan’s Law Became Federal Law, Wash. Post (May 11, 2007, 9:00 AM EDT), https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/magazine/when-megans-law-became-federal-law/2017/05/08/d9fe9cc8-2441-11e7-a1b3-faff0034e2de_story.html. ↩︎
  9. See Callie Ahlgrim, Nicki Minaj Fans Say They’re Losing Respect for the Rapper Amid Her ‘Embarrassing’ Attacks on Megan Thee Stallion, Bus. Insider (Jan. 29, 2024, 2:17 PM CST), https://www.businessinsider.com/nicki-minaj-megan-thee-stallion-feud-fan-reaction-criticism-2024-1. ↩︎
  10. Nicki Minaj’s Brother Sentenced to 25 Years for Child Rape, BBC News, https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-51280576 (last visited Feb. 8, 2024).
    ↩︎
  11. See Daniel Avila, Megan Thee Stallion Shares the Final Piece of Advice Her Mom Gave Her Before Dying: ‘Don’t Stop’, People Mag. (Aug. 12, 2022, 2:10 PM EDT), https://people.com/music/megan-thee-stallion-shares-the-final-piece-of-advice-her-mom-gave-her/. ↩︎
  12. See Peter A. Berry, Opinion, How “Big Foot” Makes Being a Nicki Minaj Fan Harder Than Ever, Complex (Jan. 30, 2024), https://www.complex.com/music/a/peter-a-berry/big-foot-nicki-minaj-failure-op-ed. ↩︎
  13. See id. at 1. ↩︎
  14. Ahlgrim, supra note 9. ↩︎
  15. Charles Holmes, Meet the Barbz: The Nicki Minaj Fandom Fighting the ‘Nicki Hate Train’, RollingStone (Aug. 1, 2018), https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/meet-the-barbz-the-nicki-minaj-fandom-fighting-the-nicki-hate-train-705438/. ↩︎
  16. Doxing (or doxxing) describes the practice of gathering and publishing someone’s personal or private information on the internet, often with malicious intent. Doxing, Cybersmile Found., https://www.cybersmile.org/advice-help/doxing (last visited Feb. 8, 2024); see also Sherma Desselle, Megan Thee Stallion, Nicki Minaj Feud Escalates as Fans Make Online Threats, Fox26 Houston (Jan. 31, 2024), https://www.fox26houston.com/news/hip-hop-feud-escalates-to-online-threats-police-patrol-local-cemetery. ↩︎
  17. Desselle, supra note 16. ↩︎
  18. Bela Delgado (@belatown), TikTok, https://www.tiktok.com/@belatown/video/7328873658703695135?_r=1&_t=8jioZ01ujpG (last visited Feb. 8, 2024). ↩︎
  19. Id. ↩︎
  20. Desselle, supra note 16. ↩︎
  21. Desselle, supra note 16. ↩︎
  22. See, e.g., @Zaytayshon88, TikTok, https://www.tiktok.com/@zaytashon/video/7329619626965486894?_r=1&_t=8jitSUiXRHf (last visited Feb. 8, 2024). ↩︎
  23. See id. ↩︎
  24. 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968. ↩︎
  25. See Dep’t of Just., Crim. Res. Manual 1-499 § 109, RICO Charges (archived) https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-109-rico-charges. ↩︎
  26. Emily A. Donaher, From the Sophisticated Undertakings of the Genovese Crime Family to the Everyday Criminal: The Loss of Congressional Intent in Modern Criminal RICO Application, 28 St. Thomas L. Rev. 197, 205 (2016). ↩︎
  27. Jeff Wagner, What Is the RICO Act, and How Does It Impact Organized Crime?, WCCO News (Aug. 22, 2023, 10:38 PM CDT), https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/rico-act-explainer/. ↩︎
  28. See 18 U.S.C. § 1961 subd. 1(A) (listing predicate acts that qualify as “racketeering activity”). ↩︎
  29. 18 U.S.C. § 1964. Like their criminal counterparts, civil RICO claims are based upon commission of a predicate act listed in § 1961. ↩︎
  30. See Chris Smith, A Guide to Megan’s Laws: Prevention of Domestic and International Sexual Exploitation of Children 2 (2021), https://ecpat.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Smith-Chris-%E2%80%93-Member-of-Congress-of-the-USA.pdf. ↩︎
  31. See Matthew J. Smith, The RICO Act, Claims and Litig. Mgmt. All. (Apr. 30, 2014), https://www.theclm.org/Magazine/articles/The-RICO-Act-Insurance-Fraud-Claims/786; see also Ave Mince-Didier, State RICO Laws, NOLO (Aug. 18, 2023), https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/state-rico-laws.htm. ↩︎
  32. See A. Laxmidas Sawkar, Note, From the Mafia to Milking Cows: State RICO Act Expansion, 41 Ariz. L. Rev. 1133, 1144 (1999); see, e.g., O.C.G.A. § 16-14-3 (listing more than forty predicate acts that qualify as racketeering). ↩︎
  33. 18 U.S.C. § 1961. See also Dep’t of Just., supra note 25. ↩︎
  34. 18 U.S.C. §§ 1962(c), 1964(c). ↩︎
  35. Id. § 1961(4). ↩︎
  36. See Russello v. United States, 464 U.S. 16, 21 (1983) (reasoning that Congress followed a “pattern of … utilizing terms and concepts of breadth” in crafting the RICO statute). ↩︎
  37. Boyle v. United States, 556 U.S. 938, 948 (2009) (quoting United States v. Turkette, 452 U.S. 576, 583 (1981)) (internal quotations omitted). ↩︎
  38. Id. (“[Groups] need not have a hierarchical structure or a chain of command . . . . Members of the group need not have fixed roles . . . . The group need not have a name, regular meetings, dues, established rules and regulations, disciplinary procedures, or induction or initiation ceremonies.”). ↩︎
  39. Id.; see Turkette, 452 U.S. at 583. ↩︎
  40. Holmes, supra note 15. ↩︎
  41. See Holmes, supra note 15; see also Wiki Minaj, Nicki Minaj Fandom, https://nickiminaj.fandom.com/f (last visited Feb. 14, 2024). ↩︎
  42. See Elizabeth Randolph, A Timeline of the Barbz Doxxing Others on Nicki Minaj’s Behalf, Distractify (Feb. 2, 2024, 5:38 PM ET), https://www.distractify.com/p/nicki-minaj-barbz-doxxing-history. ↩︎
  43. 18 U.S.C. § 1961. ↩︎
  44. Id. § 1961(5). ↩︎
  45. See H.J. Inc. v. Nw. Bell Tel. Co., 492 U.S. 229, 230 (1989). ↩︎
  46. See Minn. Stat. § 609.902 subd. 6. ↩︎
  47. See H.J. Inc., 292 U.S. at 239 (quoting 116 Cong. Rec., at 18940 (1970) (statement of Sen. McClellan)). ↩︎
  48. Id. at 241. ↩︎
  49. Id. at 240. ↩︎
  50. Id. at 242, 246. ↩︎
  51. Randolph, supra note 42. ↩︎
  52. 18 U.S.C. § 1951(b)(2). ↩︎
  53. See, e.g., Walker v. Beaumont Ind. Sch. Dist., 938 F.3d 724, 738 (5th Cir. 2019). ↩︎
  54. Reves v. Ernst & Young, 507 U.S. 170, 176 (1993); see also Dep’t of Econ. Dev. v. Arthur Anderson & Co. (U.S.A.), 924 F.Supp. 449, 466 (S.D.N.Y. 1996). ↩︎

Posted

in

by

USTLawJournal

Tags:

Comments

Leave a comment

Blog at WordPress.com.