The trial over Blake Lively‘s sexual harassment and smear campaign claims against Justin Baldoni is still set for May, and the parties are still going through the motions of court-ordered settlement talks. But a hearing Thursday may provide a look at where this It Ends With Us battle is really going.
There was no decision from Judge Lewis Liman at today’s just concluded summary judgment session and no indication when a ruling could be coming. However, with Lively and Baldoni not in attendance, the hearing saw Baldoni lawyer Jonathan Bach insisting that the actress’ case should be tossed out because she knew what she was getting into on the Wayfarer Studios-produced and Sony-distributed IEWU.
Lively signed on to “portray a steamy and turbulent romance at the heart of the film,” the Sean “Diddy” Combs trial veteran said this morning during the New York City federal court hearing. Clearly surprised by the remark, Liman interrupted Bach for clarification. With a skeptical tone, the judge, the brother of director Doug Liman, asked if the lawyer intended suggest that as an actress “you’ve subjected yourself to all kinds of sexual harassment.” Bach replied in the negative but added that “context matters.”
In what may come back to haunt him, Bach additionally waved off Lively’s issues as “small potatoes” and mainly about “trivial things and petty slights.”
“It’s not enough to show that sex or sexuality found its way into the workplace,” Bach pressed on regarding the plaintiff’s case. “Their burden is to show that it not only entered the workplace, but was used to discriminate against women.” The line of reasoning and perspective did not seem to go over well with Liman, who noted from the bench that “A whole bunch of little things can add up to a big thing.”
Lively attorney Esra Hudson argued back that “the nature of the workplace does not absolve the defendants.” As contract law and “spoliation” sanctions moved to the forefront, that was the tone and back and forth Thursday for most of the four-hour hearing at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse near the Big Apple’s Chinatown neighborhood.
Famously described by Judge Liman as a “feud between PR films,” the accusations of misconduct on It Ends With Us and a digital attack on Lively by Baldoni in the film’s aftermath first officially came into public view with the actress’ December 2024-filed California Civil Rights Department complaint. As various lawsuits around the matter continue in various courts, the original case saw Baldoni’s $400 million countersuit over what really occurred during the making of the hit movie and the supposed attacks against Lively in the lead-up to its August 2024 premiere dismissed last June.
Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni in ‘It Ends With Us’
Sony Pictures Releasing / courtesy Everett Collection
To that, with a reference at one point to HBO Max’s hot and steamy hit hockey drama Heated Rivalry, retaliation and the alleged peremptory online 2024 astroturfing blitz against Lively became the heart of Thursday’s dense hearing. Specifically, with Lively aiming to keep much of her $550 million damages case intact, the focus was on communication among Baldoni, Wayfarer brass and PR bosses Melissa Nathan and Jennifer Abel to take down Lively before she went public with her accusations against her IEWU co-star/director.
“This is a new form of retaliation — social media manipulation designed to bury and harm Ms. Lively,” attorney Matthew Bruno told the courtroom. “They had a duty to preserve evidence,” the Manatt, Phelps & Phillips lawyer added of Signal chats between the defendants that auto-deleted on the communications app.
Citing the use of Signal as part of the “plan” to put together a Lively smear campaign with the auto-delete function intentionally “enabled,” Bruno declared that the “lost Signal communications create an evidentiary gap.” Baldoni, publicists and execs have denied they launched a prepped digital smear campaign against Lively because they didn’t need to thanks to organic backlash against the A Simple Favor franchise star.
In contrast, Lively’s side unsealed a plethora of filings, depositions, scathing texts, emails and more earlier this week that had Lively pal Taylor Swift calling Baldoni a “bitch,” and which featured walk-ons from Ben Affleck, IEWU co-star Jenny Slate (who said Baldoni was “the biggest clown and the most intense narcissist”), IEWU author Colleen Hoover, Hugh Jackman and, of course, Lively’s husband Ryan Reynolds. It was, as Baldoni’s team implied today, not a good look for the defendants.
Outside the courthouse following the hearing, Lively lawyer Sigrid McCawley, who has represented a number of Jeffrey Epstein’s victims in their own legal proceedings, spoke of her client’s desire to take the case to trial.
“She really is in a position where she’s got mountains of strong evidence,” McCawley said. “She feels very good about her claims, and she wants to send a message to all for all women, that if you are wronged and harmed in the workplace, you can stand up for yourself. You can say that this is not right and should not continue.”
Asked about whether Swift or Reynolds would testify at trial and how The Life of a Showgirl superstar feels about being repeatedly dragged into the matter, an on-point McCawley noted: “Certainly, Blake Lively has done everything she can to protect her friends from not being brought into this. It was the Baldoni parties who brought that evidence into this case. It’s not relevant, and what’s relevant is her claims that she was sexually harassed in the workplace.”
Right now, as Liman’s summary judgment ruling looms, a February 11 settlement hearing is on the books with Lively and Baldoni expected to be in the courtroom. Pushed back once again just a month ago, the actual trial is now set for May 18, 2026, though don’t be too shocked if that changes again.
