Blake Lively, Justin Baldoni, and a $250 Million Lawsuit: A Hollywood Saga Unfolds
A seemingly innocuous text exchange between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni in June 2023 took a dramatic turn eighteen months later, becoming a central point in a $250 million defamation lawsuit filed against *The New York Times*. The initial texts, included as evidence in the lawsuit, showed Lively politely requesting updated script pages and suggesting a line run-through. However, *The New York Times* December 2023 article, “‘We Can Bury Anyone’: Inside a Hollywood Smear Machine,” presented a drastically different narrative, alleging that Baldoni repeatedly entered Lively’s makeup trailer uninvited while she was undressed, even while breastfeeding.
This stark contrast forms the crux of the lawsuit filed in Los Angeles Superior Court by Baldoni and nine other plaintiffs, including publicists Melissa Nathan and Jennifer Abel and producers Jamey Heath and Steve Sarowitz. The plaintiffs accuse *The New York Times* of libel and false light invasion of privacy, claiming the article relied on “cherry-picked” and manipulated communications stripped of context. They allege that the *Times* misrepresented events to create a narrative portraying Baldoni as a sexual harasser and Lively as a victim subjected to retaliation. A spokesperson for *The New York Times* responded by stating that their story was meticulously reported and based on a review of thousands of pages of documents, and they intend to vigorously defend against the lawsuit.
The 87-page complaint counters the *Times’* portrayal, asserting that Lively orchestrated a “strategic and manipulative” smear campaign using false sexual harassment allegations to control the production of “It Ends With Us.” The lawsuit further alleges that Lively’s husband, Ryan Reynolds, aggressively confronted Baldoni at their Tribeca penthouse, accusing him of “fat-shaming” his wife, and pressured Baldoni’s agency, WME, to drop him as a client. WME denies any such pressure. Attorney Bryan Freedman, representing the plaintiffs, alleges the *Times* cowered to the influence of Lively and Reynolds, disregarding journalistic ethics.
The lawsuit challenges specific instances highlighted in the *Times’* article. One example involves text exchanges between Nathan and Abel seemingly celebrating a negative *Daily Mail* story about Lively. The lawsuit argues that the *Times* omitted crucial context, including a text from Nathan stating her non-involvement, and misrepresented the use of an emoji to suggest sarcasm. Similarly, the lawsuit refutes Lively’s claim that Heath showed her a video of his naked wife, describing it instead as a non-pornographic recording of his wife during a home birth, shown in the context of discussing a birthing scene in the film. The suit also contests Lively’s allegation that Baldoni inappropriately described her character’s attire as “sexy,” citing texts where Lively herself used the word “sexier” to describe wardrobe options.
The lawsuit casts doubt on the veracity of a 30-item list of alleged agreements from a January meeting, claiming that no such document exists and that many of the items were fabricated. It also alleges that Lively’s team obtained text messages used in the *Times’* article through a questionable subpoena to Baldoni’s former publicist’s firm, raising questions about the legality of obtaining this confidential information. Further, the lawsuit challenges the *Times’* account of Lively’s objections to sex scenes, presenting text messages showing Lively’s lack of urgency in meeting the intimacy coordinator. Finally, the lawsuit notes that the *Times* reached out for comment just before a holiday weekend, giving the plaintiffs limited time to respond.
Following the publication of this article, Lively’s attorneys confirmed they filed a separate federal complaint against Wayfarer Studios and Baldoni et al in the Southern District of New York, alleging retaliation for reporting sexual harassment and workplace safety concerns. The complex legal battle continues to unfold, highlighting the intense power dynamics and potential consequences within the Hollywood industry.