Taylor Swift continues to be dragged into the legal drama ensuing between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni.
Days after Lively requested a protective order against Baldoni’s request to access Lively and Swift’s private text messages, Judge Lewis Liman denied the motion on June 18.
“A motion or request may be, and in this case often has been, both a legitimate litigation tactic and an attempt to maneuver in the broader court of public opinion,” Judge Liman wrote.
BLAKE LIVELY SEEKS PROTECTIVE ORDER AGAINST JUSTIN BALDONI’S TEAM OVER TAYLOR SWIFT COMMUNICATIONS
“Given that Lively has represented that Swift had knowledge of complaints or discussions about the working environment on the film, among other issues, the requests for messages with Swift regarding the film (‘It Ends With Us’) and this action are reasonably tailored to discover information that would prove or disprove Lively’s harassment and retaliation claims,” he added.
In a statement to Fox News Digital, a representative for Lively said they will continue to fight against Baldoni’s “relentless efforts” to exploit “Swift’s popularity.”
TAYLOR SWIFT NO LONGER REQUIRED TO TESTIFY IN JUSTIN BALDONI’S LEGAL DISPUTE WITH BLAKE LIVELY
“The Court outright denied the Wayfarer Parties’ motion to compel documents from Ms. Lively, who has produced far more documents in this case than the Wayfarer Parties combined. Further, the Court’s protective order ruling rests on the Wayfarer Parties’ admission that they received nothing from Taylor Swift, which is exactly the opposite of what their ‘insider’ claimed two weeks ago,” the representative stated.
“As for the rest, Justin Baldoni and the Wayfarer parties demanded access to Taylor Swift’s private communications—despite having already subpoenaed and then withdrawn that subpoena. Baldoni’s desire to drag Taylor Swift into this has been constant dating back to August 2024, when the crisis PR firm led by Melissa Nathan included her in their ‘Scenario Planning’ document (Lively Amended Complaint, Exhibit D), referred to her as a bully, and called for a strategy to influence the ‘TS fanbase’ (Lively Amended Complaint, ¶214(b)),” the representative continued.
“We will continue to call out Baldoni’s relentless efforts to exploit Ms Swift’s popularity, which from day one has been nothing more than a distraction from the serious sexual harassment and retaliation accusations he and the Wayfarer parties are facing.”
Representatives for Baldoni and Swift did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.
Swift was subpoenaed as a witness in the Lively-Baldoni dispute, but Baldoni’s team has withdrawn the request, Fox News Digital confirmed in May.
A source with direct knowledge of the case told Fox News Digital at the time, “When information is voluntarily received, there is no need for subpoenas.”
LIKE WHAT YOU’RE READING? CLICK HERE FOR MORE ENTERTAINMENT NEWS
After Swift was subpoenaed May 10, a spokesperson for the pop star denied her involvement in the 2024 film “It Ends With Us” aside from the licensing of her song “My Tears Ricochet,” which was featured in the movie’s trailer and used in one scene.
“Taylor Swift never set foot on the set of this movie. She was not involved in any casting or creative decisions. She did not score the film. She never saw an edit or made any notes on the film. She did not even see ‘It Ends With Us’ until weeks after its public release and was traveling around the globe during 2023 and 2024 headlining the biggest tour in history,” Swift’s representative told Fox News Digital at the time.
WATCH: WHAT IS GOING ON BETWEEN BLAKE LIVELY AND JUSTIN BALDONI?
“The connection Taylor had to this film was permitting the use of one song, ‘My Tears Ricochet,'” the spokesperson added. “Given that her involvement was licensing a song for the film, which 19 other artists also did, this document subpoena is designed to use Taylor Swift’s name to draw public interest by creating tabloid clickbait instead of focusing on the facts of the case.”
Baldoni and Lively’s legal fight is scheduled to go to trial before a New York court in March 2026.
Fox News Digital’s Janelle Ash and Lauryn Overhultz contributed to this post.
