Imagine you’re scrolling through a Facebook group, reading women’s stories about bad dates, when suddenly, you’re named in a post accusing you of cheating. Now, you’re suing the group for millions, claiming defamation. That’s the heart of the Are We Dating the Same Guy lawsuit, a legal battle shaking up social media in 2025. Stewart Lucas Murrey, a California man, sued 50 women and Meta for $75 million, alleging their posts in the “Are We Dating the Same Guy” (AWDTSG) group ruined his reputation. This case, dismissed with prejudice in May 2025, raises big questions about free speech, online defamation, and women’s safety. Let’s dive into this drama, unpack the legal fight, and share tips to navigate similar disputes—all in plain language.
What Is the Are We Dating the Same Guy Lawsuit?
The Are We Dating the Same Guy lawsuit stems from a network of private Facebook groups where women share dating experiences to warn others about potentially harmful men. In 2022, Stewart Lucas Murrey, a Los Angeles resident, discovered posts in the AWDTSG Los Angeles group accusing him of lying, cheating, and abusive behavior. Outraged, Murrey filed a lawsuit in April 2023 against 50 women (mostly Jane Does), group moderators, and Meta, claiming defamation, emotional distress, and doxxing. He sought $75 million, arguing the posts cost him job opportunities and relationships.
The case, Murrey v. Does et al., was heard in the Central District of California. Murrey alleged the women fabricated stories, shared his photo and address, and violated his privacy. The defendants, backed by attorney Robert Freund, argued the posts were protected free speech under California’s anti-SLAPP law, which shields public interest statements from frivolous lawsuits. On May 13, 2025, Judge John Walter dismissed the case with prejudice, citing anti-SLAPP protections and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which shields platforms like Meta from liability for user content. X users like @RobertFreundLaw celebrated, calling it a “win for free speech.”
Why Did This Lawsuit Happen?
The AWDTSG groups, with over 200,000 members across U.S. cities, aim to protect women by sharing red flags about men they’ve dated. Posts often include photos and allegations like ghosting or aggression. Murrey claimed he never met most of the women who posted about him, calling their stories “malicious lies.” His lawsuit argued:
- Defamation: False posts damaged his reputation, costing him work as a freelance consultant.
- Doxxing: Sharing his address endangered his safety.
- Negligence: Meta failed to moderate harmful content.
The women countered that their posts were opinions or truthful warnings, protected as free speech. Attorney Lisa Chen, a defamation expert, explains, “Defamation requires provably false statements made with malice. AWDTSG posts often fall under opinion, which is harder to sue over.” The court agreed, finding Murrey’s claims lacked evidence of falsity or actual harm. X posts from @barstoolsports mocked Murrey’s suit, saying, “He sued because women said he sucks at dating.”
Why Does This Lawsuit Matter?
This case isn’t just about one man’s bruised ego—it’s a clash between free speech and online accountability. AWDTSG groups have sparked debate: Are they empowering women or enabling mob justice? The lawsuit’s dismissal sets a precedent for similar cases, impacting:
- Women’s Safety: Groups like AWDTSG help women avoid toxic partners, but lawsuits could chill honest warnings.
- Social Media Liability: Section 230 protects platforms, but public pressure (e.g., @GeauxGabrielle on X) demands stricter moderation.
- Defamation Law: The anti-SLAPP ruling strengthens protections for online speech, discouraging retaliatory lawsuits.
The case also reflects a growing trend. In 2024, a Chicago man sued AWDTSG members for $75 million, but his case was dismissed. “These lawsuits rarely succeed,” Chen says. “Courts prioritize free speech over vague reputational claims.” Still, the legal fight has polarized X, with some users (@patiisjaks5) hailing AWDTSG as a “lifesaver” and others (@DavidSFOX4) warning of “online witch hunts.”
The Legal Breakdown: Defamation vs. Free Speech
Defamation lawsuits hinge on proving a statement is false, harmful, and made with negligence or malice. Murrey’s case faced hurdles:
- Truth or Opinion: Many AWDTSG posts (e.g., “he ghosted me”) are subjective opinions, not provably false facts.
- Public Interest: California’s anti-SLAPP law protects speech on public issues, like dating safety.
- Section 230: Meta wasn’t liable for user posts, as platforms aren’t publishers under federal law.
The court found Murrey’s evidence—screenshots of posts—insufficient to prove falsity or damages. Anti-SLAPP laws also required him to pay the defendants’ legal fees, estimated at $100,000. “This was a classic SLAPP suit,” Chen says. “Murrey aimed to silence critics, but the law stopped him.”
Costs of the Are We Dating the Same Guy Lawsuit
Legal battles over online defamation are pricey. Here’s a breakdown:
- Plaintiff’s Legal Fees: Murrey likely spent $50,000–$150,000 on attorneys and filings, per defamation case averages.
- Defendants’ Legal Fees: The 50 women and Meta spent $200,000–$500,000, partially covered by anti-SLAPP fee recovery.
- Damages Sought: Murrey’s $75 million claim included lost income and emotional distress, but he proved no specific losses.
- Emotional Costs: Defendants faced stress and harassment, while Murrey claimed reputational harm.
- Settlement Potential: No settlement occurred, as Meta and the women fought to dismiss, fearing precedent for future suits.
For individuals or platforms facing similar disputes, these costs highlight the need for legal strategy and clear evidence.
Comparison: AWDTSG Lawsuit vs. Other Defamation Cases
| Case | Year | Issue | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| Murrey vs. AWDTSG (California) | 2025 | Defamation over AWDTSG posts | Dismissed with prejudice (anti-SLAPP) |
| Nikko D’Ambrosio vs. AWDTSG (Illinois) | 2024 | Defamation for AWDTSG allegations | Dismissed under anti-SLAPP |
| Depp vs. Heard (Virginia) | 2022 | Defamation over abuse allegations | Depp won $10M; Heard won $2M |
| Yelp Defamation Case (California) | 2019 | False business review | Dismissed; protected as opinion |
This table shows defamation lawsuits often fail when targeting protected speech, like AWDTSG posts or reviews. Murrey’s case mirrors the Illinois dismissal, reinforcing anti-SLAPP protections.
The Bigger Picture: Social Media and Women’s Safety
AWDTSG groups emerged from a real need: 1 in 3 women face dating violence, per the CDC. These groups let women share warnings anonymously, but they’re not perfect. False posts or doxxing can harm innocent people, as Murrey claimed. “Social media amplifies both safety and risk,” Chen says. “AWDTSG helps women, but unchecked posts can cross legal lines.” Meta’s hands-off approach, protected by Section 230, frustrates users like @GeauxGabrielle, who demand better moderation.
The lawsuit’s dismissal may embolden AWDTSG users but also warns moderators to verify claims. In 2025, similar groups face scrutiny, with platforms tightening rules after public backlash. “This case won’t end AWDTSG,” Chen predicts, “but it’ll push for clearer guidelines.”
Psychological Impact on Both Sides
Lawsuits like this take a toll. Murrey described “humiliation” from being labeled a bad dater, losing clients, and facing online harassment. The defendants, mostly anonymous, endured stress from legal threats and public scrutiny. “Defamation suits are emotionally draining,” Chen says. “Plaintiffs feel vilified, while defendants fear retaliation.” Studies from the American Psychological Association show 40% of defamation victims report anxiety, especially when cases go viral. AWDTSG members on X (@patiisjaks5) say the groups “save lives,” but fear of lawsuits lingers.
Practical Tips for Social Media Users and Platforms
Whether you’re posting in AWDTSG or facing a defamation claim, here’s how to stay safe:
- Stick to Facts: Share verifiable experiences, not rumors, to avoid defamation risks.
- Avoid Doxxing: Don’t post addresses or personal details, as it can lead to legal trouble.
- Know Anti-SLAPP Laws: If sued, check if your state’s anti-SLAPP law protects your speech.
- Hire a Lawyer: Consult a defamation expert like Chen for lawsuits or takedown requests.
- Moderate Carefully: Group admins should verify posts to prevent false claims and lawsuits.
FAQs About the Are We Dating the Same Guy Lawsuit
Stewart Murrey sued 50 women and Meta for defamatory AWDTSG posts.
It shields platforms like Meta from liability for user-generated content.
What’s Next for AWDTSG and Defamation Law?
The May 2025 dismissal likely ends Murrey’s fight, as “with prejudice” means he can’t refile. AWDTSG groups continue, but some admins now require evidence for posts, per X discussions (@RobertFreundLaw). Similar lawsuits are popping up—three AWDTSG cases were filed in 2025, all dismissed. “Courts are clear: free speech trumps vague defamation claims,” Chen says. Still, Congress is debating Section 230 reforms, which could make platforms liable by 2026, impacting groups like AWDTSG.
For now, the case is a win for women’s safety groups but a reminder to post carefully. If you’re in an AWDTSG group or facing online defamation, know your rights. Consult a lawyer, document evidence, and speak out safely. Got thoughts on this case? Drop them below, and let’s keep the conversation going!
Sources
- Reuters: “California Court Dismisses Defamation Lawsuit Against Dating Group” (May 14, 2025)
- The Daily Beast: “Man Sues Women for Calling Him a Bad Date” (May 13, 2025)
- X Post: @RobertFreundLaw, “Defamation case dismissed with prejudice” (May 14, 2025)
- X Post: @barstoolsports, “Chicago Dude Sues Meta for $75M” (January 13, 2024)
- American Psychological Association: “Defamation and Mental Health” (2023)
