Judge Orders Blake Lively to Hand Over Taylor Swift Texts in Legal Fight with Justin Baldoni
In a dramatic turn in one of Hollywood’s most closely watched legal battles, a federal judge has ruled that actress Blake Lively must provide text message communications between herself and singer-songwriter Taylor Swift to actor-director Justin Baldoni’s legal team. The ruling stems from an ongoing lawsuit involving accusations of misconduct, defamation, and alleged behind-the-scenes manipulation tied to the film It Ends With Us.
The decision, handed down earlier this week in a New York federal court, has added a new layer of intrigue to the already sensational case—bringing one of the world’s most famous pop stars directly into the fray.
The Origins of the Dispute
The legal conflict began in late 2024 when Blake Lively filed a lawsuit against Baldoni and his production company, Wayfarer Studios. Lively accused Baldoni of sexual harassment, fostering a hostile work environment, and retaliating against her when she raised objections during the filming of It Ends With Us, an adaptation of Colleen Hoover’s bestselling novel.
Baldoni denied the allegations and responded in early 2025 with a $400 million countersuit, claiming defamation, emotional distress, and reputational damage. In his suit, Baldoni alleged that Lively had attempted to pressure him through third parties—including her close friends Ryan Reynolds and Taylor Swift—into approving a version of the film’s script she preferred. He claimed Lively used her celebrity relationships as leverage, calling them her “dragons,” in a reference reportedly made in private communications.
While a large portion of Baldoni’s countersuit was later dismissed by Judge Lewis J. Liman, the question of whether communications with Swift were relevant remained unresolved—until now.
Judge Rules Swift’s Texts May Be Key Evidence
Judge Liman ruled on June 18 that Lively’s text messages with Taylor Swift are admissible as part of the discovery process and must be turned over to Baldoni’s team. The judge concluded that the messages could be “highly relevant” to understanding the dynamics behind Lively’s actions during production and whether third parties, including Swift, were used to exert improper influence or threaten reputational harm.
According to court documents, Baldoni's attorneys argued that Lively invoked Swift’s name in communications intended to intimidate or manipulate outcomes related to script approvals and public relations strategies. A now-public excerpt from a message reportedly sent by Lively referred to herself as “Khaleesi” from Game of Thrones, implying that Swift and Reynolds were her “dragons”—powerful allies she could unleash if necessary.
Lively’s legal team fought to block access to the texts, citing Swift’s lack of involvement in the litigation and a concern for her privacy. They argued that dragging Swift into the legal battle was “irrelevant and invasive,” and accused Baldoni of using Swift’s name to generate media attention.
However, Judge Liman dismissed those concerns, stating that “celebrity status alone does not exempt someone from being part of a legal discovery process if the communications are material to the case.” He did, however, place restrictions on how the messages may be used, limiting their visibility to lawyers and the court under a protective order.
Taylor Swift’s Reluctant Involvement
Swift has yet to comment publicly on the ruling. A representative for the singer previously dismissed Baldoni’s subpoena efforts as “an outrageous publicity stunt,” insisting that Swift had nothing to do with the legal dispute and that her only involvement with the film was granting the use of her song “My Tears Ricochet” for its soundtrack.
Sources close to Swift say she has been privately frustrated by the situation and felt blindsided by her name appearing repeatedly in court filings. Though known for her close friendship with Lively and Reynolds, insiders now claim that Swift has “distanced herself” from the conflict to avoid being further entangled in what she views as a “deeply personal” and “messy” legal issue.
One source told Page Six, “Taylor didn’t sign up for this. She licensed a song. She didn’t want to be dragged into a lawsuit.”
Fallout and Reactions
The court order has intensified public and legal interest in a case already notable for its star-studded cast of characters and emotional stakes. While the exact contents of the Swift-Lively texts remain sealed under the court’s confidentiality order, the possibility that they could eventually be revealed—either during trial or through leaks—has captured headlines around the world.
Lively’s team criticized the ruling, saying in a statement that “forcing disclosure of private conversations with someone not involved in the case is an unnecessary overreach that serves no purpose other than fueling a media spectacle.”
Baldoni’s attorneys, by contrast, hailed the ruling as a key legal victory. “This decision allows our client to fully explore evidence relevant to his defense and counterclaims,” said a spokesperson.
A Complicated Friendship in Jeopardy?
The legal saga may also have personal consequences. Lively and Swift have long been known for their high-profile friendship—appearing together at events, exchanging birthday messages on social media, and vacationing with their respective partners. But insiders now speculate that the court case may have strained their relationship.
According to multiple sources, Swift feels caught in the middle and unhappy about being implicated in a conflict that could affect her own public image. “She will always love Blake, but this situation has changed things,” said one unnamed source.
What Comes Next
The case is expected to head to trial in early 2026 unless settled beforehand. More discovery is underway, and the judge has warned both sides against using the court process to pursue publicity at the expense of justice.
For now, Blake Lively must comply with the order to hand over her texts with Taylor Swift—adding yet another layer of drama to a legal battle that continues to blend Hollywood, celebrity, and the law in unpredictable ways.
.jpeg)
0 Comments