Blake Lively Seeks Court Protection Over Private Communications with Taylor Swift in Legal Battle with Justin Baldoni

In a growing legal confrontation that now involves multiple lawsuits and high-profile names, actress Blake Lively has filed a formal request with a federal judge to protect her private communications with singer Taylor Swift from being disclosed, specifically from director and actor Justin Baldoni and his Wayfarer Studios.

According to a letter submitted by attorney Esra A. Hudson to Judge Lewis J. Liman, Lively is seeking a protective order to halt persistent attempts by the Wayfarer Parties to access her personal messages with Swift. Hudson argues that these efforts are part of a broader media-driven legal strategy designed to attract public attention by leveraging Swift’s fame.

“Ms. Swift is not central to Ms. Lively’s claims… and is otherwise irrelevant to the Wayfarer Parties’ claims, which were dismissed on June 9,” Hudson states in the motion.

Legal Context and Escalation

The case stems from a December 2024 complaint filed by Lively against Baldoni, alleging sexual harassment and retaliation during their work on It Ends With Us. That initial filing has since evolved into a complex legal conflict involving Lively, her husband Ryan Reynolds, their publicist Leslie Sloane, and even pop star Taylor Swift, who contributed music to the It Ends With Us soundtrack.

In response, Baldoni and his team filed a $400 million defamation and extortion countersuit, which was partially dismissed by Judge Liman, with permission to refile a narrower claim by June 23.

Taylor Swift’s Involvement

While Swift has no direct role in the harassment claims, her presence at a creative meeting between Lively and Baldoni in New York placed her name in legal filings. Baldoni’s attorneys even served Swift and her legal team at Venable LLP with a subpoena, which was later withdrawn on May 22.

Swift’s representatives sharply criticized the subpoena, calling it an attempt to “create tabloid clickbait.” Her lawyer Doug Baldridge confirmed via email that Swift’s team “has not produced any materials” and that “no deposition is being scheduled.”

Still, Lively’s legal team believes the subpoena was issued purely for publicity, not discovery. “The purpose was not to obtain discovery but rather press reports,” Hudson states in the filing.

Privacy vs. Publicity

Lively’s request aims to prevent any future misuse of her private conversations for media leverage. Her legal team argues that including Swift’s name in this litigation is unnecessary and potentially damaging, especially given the lack of relevance to the core legal issues at hand.

Despite additional subpoenas filed against Scooter Braun and HYBE America — both associated with Swift in the public eye — no settlement discussions have been confirmed between the Lively and Baldoni camps.

What’s Next?

With a trial date set for March 9, 2026, both sides continue to escalate their claims. As media attention intensifies, the legal strategies appear increasingly entangled with public relations tactics, with Taylor Swift’s name caught in the legal and media crossfire.