Latest news with #Baldoni
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Blake Lively backed by advocacy groups in legal fight with Justin Baldoni over #MeToo speech law
Blake Lively's effort to dismiss Justin Baldoni's defamation countersuit is getting a boost from several advocacy groups, who say the case threatens a hard-won legal protection for people who speak out about sexual harassment and misconduct. Equal Rights Advocates, a San Francisco–based legal nonprofit that advocates for gender equity and workplace protections, filed an amicus brief on Tuesday urging a federal judge to uphold Lively's motion and defend California's new free speech law protecting those who speak publicly about sexual misconduct. Additional briefs are expected in the coming days from advocacy groups including Child USA and Sanctuary for Families. The briefs mark the latest salvo in a months-long legal clash between Lively and Baldoni, whose bitter dispute stemming from the production of last year's romantic drama "It Ends With Us" has played out in court and the press. Lively has accused Baldoni, her co-star and the film's director, of harassing her during filming, citing improvised on-set physical contact, inappropriate conduct and alleged retaliation after she raised concerns — claims he has denied. Advocates say her case highlights the kind of public allegations that the law was meant to protect, and warn that a ruling against her could chill speech around harassment. 'If the law were to be struck down, it wouldn't just affect Blake Lively — it would essentially do away with the protections for all survivors,' said Jessica Schidlow, legal director at Child USA, a nonprofit that advocates for stronger protections for abuse survivors. 'It would be a devastating setback and completely undermine the purpose of the law, which was to make it easier for victims to come forward and to speak their truth without fear of retaliation.' Read more: Blake Lively moves to dismiss Justin Baldoni's countersuit, citing California law on misconduct claims Lively invoked the law — California Civil Code Section 47.1, enacted in 2023 as part of Assembly Bill 933 — in a motion filed in March to dismiss Baldoni's $400-million countersuit, which alleges she falsely accused him of harassment and retaliation and tried to wrest control of the film from him. Baldoni's legal team has strongly opposed the dismissal motion, arguing that Lively's accusations were knowingly false and that the statute she invoked is itself unconstitutional. They argue the law goes too far by threatening steep financial penalties, saying it could discourage people from going to court to defend themselves against false accusations. 'In no event, on this Motion or at any stage of this proceeding, will the First Amendment permit the extreme and unconstitutional award of fees, costs and treble and punitive damages Lively demands,' the filing states. That position drew a sharp response from Victoria Burke, an attorney who helped push for AB 933 and is now leading efforts to pass similar legislation in 16 other states. 'I was highly disappointed with that move,' said Burke, who is filing her own amicus brief in the case. 'He's put himself out there as a feminist, and this undoes a lot of the good he had been doing. It just seemed cruel and unnecessary — to try to destroy a law that was designed to protect all survivors, just to go after one.' Lively's attorneys Mike Gottlieb and Esra Hudson also pushed back forcefully on the constitutional challenge, saying in a statement that Baldoni and the other defendants were 'so hell bent on trying to destroy Blake Lively that they are willing to shred a law designed to protect all victims just to make sure they 'bury' one." Read more: Inside the bare-knuckle legal brawl between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni AB 933 was designed to shield people who speak out about sexual harassment, assault or discrimination from retaliatory defamation suits, provided their statements weren't made with 'actual malice.' It also includes a fee-shifting provision that requires unsuccessful plaintiffs to pay legal costs and allows for treble and punitive damages. In a March 4 filing in federal court in New York, Lively's attorneys argued that Baldoni's countersuit is precisely the kind of retaliation that California's new law was meant to prevent. 'The law prohibits weaponizing defamation lawsuits, like this one, to retaliate against individuals who have filed legal claims or have publicly spoken out about sexual harassment and retaliation,' the brief states. The case marks the first major test of AB 933 since it was signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom in October 2023. The outcome could set an early precedent for how far courts are willing to go in upholding the law — and what protections it ultimately provides for those who speak out about alleged misconduct. 'As more survivors came forward, the people who harmed them were increasingly using defamation lawsuits as weapons to try to silence them,' said Jessica Stender, deputy legal director at Equal Rights Advocates, one of the organizations that co-sponsored AB 933. 'When you see high-profile cases, like the Amber Heard–Johnny Depp case or in this case Blake Lively — survivors without money or fame are scared when they see what can happen to even a rich and famous person, and think, 'That could happen to me, and I can't take that chance.'" Read more: Justin Baldoni's tumultuous road to the center of a Hollywood scandal Lively's team, in a May 13 reply brief, defended the law's constitutionality and reiterated that her public statements were protected under AB 933. 'The First Amendment empowers legislatures to protect victims' First Amendment rights via fee-shifting rules designed to deter retaliatory litigation,' her attorneys wrote. The court has not yet ruled on Lively's motion to dismiss. If granted, it could deal a significant blow to Baldoni's countersuit — and shape how AB 933 is interpreted in future cases involving public allegations of misconduct. As other states look to adopt similar legislation, advocates say the outcome of the case could have ripple effects far beyond California. 'We want to be able to ensure that there is a social and legal environment where you can speak your truth and report sexual assault and harassment without fear of being sued,' said Dorchen Leidholdt, senior director of legal services at Sanctuary for Families, a New York–based nonprofit that provides legal and support services to survivors of gender-based violence. 'Legal retaliatory actions like the one brought by Mr. Baldoni and his team are doing enormous damage to victims, not just in California but across the country — affecting not only celebrity victims, but ordinary people.' Sign up for Indie Focus, a weekly newsletter about movies and what's going on in the wild world of cinema. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles Times
4 days ago
- Entertainment
- Los Angeles Times
Blake Lively backed by advocacy groups in legal fight with Justin Baldoni over #MeToo speech law
Blake Lively's effort to dismiss Justin Baldoni's defamation countersuit is getting a boost from several advocacy groups, who say the case threatens a hard-won legal protection for people who speak out about sexual harassment and misconduct. Equal Rights Advocates, a San Francisco–based legal nonprofit that advocates for gender equity and workplace protections, filed an amicus brief on Tuesday urging a federal judge to uphold Lively's motion and defend California's new free speech law protecting those who speak publicly about sexual misconduct. Additional briefs are expected in the coming days from advocacy groups including Child USA and Sanctuary for Families. The briefs mark the latest salvo in a months-long legal clash between Lively and Baldoni, whose bitter dispute stemming from the production of last year's romantic drama 'It Ends With Us' has played out in court and the press. Lively has accused Baldoni, her co-star and the film's director, of harassing her during filming, citing improvised on-set physical contact, inappropriate conduct and alleged retaliation after she raised concerns — claims he has denied. Advocates say her case highlights the kind of public allegations that the law was meant to protect, and warn that a ruling against her could chill speech around harassment. 'If the law were to be struck down, it wouldn't just affect Blake Lively — it would essentially do away with the protections for all survivors,' said Jessica Schidlow, legal director at Child USA, a nonprofit that advocates for stronger protections for abuse survivors. 'It would be a devastating setback and completely undermine the purpose of the law, which was to make it easier for victims to come forward and to speak their truth without fear of retaliation.' Lively invoked the law — California Civil Code Section 47.1, enacted in 2023 as part of Assembly Bill 933 — in a motion filed in March to dismiss Baldoni's $400-million countersuit, which alleges she falsely accused him of harassment and retaliation and tried to wrest control of the film from him. Baldoni's legal team has strongly opposed the dismissal motion, arguing that Lively's accusations were knowingly false and that the statute she invoked is itself unconstitutional. They argue the law goes too far by threatening steep financial penalties, saying it could discourage people from going to court to defend themselves against false accusations. 'In no event, on this Motion or at any stage of this proceeding, will the First Amendment permit the extreme and unconstitutional award of fees, costs and treble and punitive damages Lively demands,' the filing states. That position drew a sharp response from Victoria Burke, an attorney who helped push for AB 933 and is now leading efforts to pass similar legislation in 16 other states. 'I was highly disappointed with that move,' said Burke, who is filing her own amicus brief in the case. 'He's put himself out there as a feminist, and this undoes a lot of the good he had been doing. It just seemed cruel and unnecessary — to try to destroy a law that was designed to protect all survivors, just to go after one.' Lively's attorneys Mike Gottlieb and Esra Hudson also pushed back forcefully on the constitutional challenge, saying in a statement that Baldoni and the other defendants were 'so hell bent on trying to destroy Blake Lively that they are willing to shred a law designed to protect all victims just to make sure they 'bury' one.' AB 933 was designed to shield people who speak out about sexual harassment, assault or discrimination from retaliatory defamation suits, provided their statements weren't made with 'actual malice.' It also includes a fee-shifting provision that requires unsuccessful plaintiffs to pay legal costs and allows for treble and punitive damages. In a March 4 filing in federal court in New York, Lively's attorneys argued that Baldoni's countersuit is precisely the kind of retaliation that California's new law was meant to prevent. 'The law prohibits weaponizing defamation lawsuits, like this one, to retaliate against individuals who have filed legal claims or have publicly spoken out about sexual harassment and retaliation,' the brief states. The case marks the first major test of AB 933 since it was signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom in October 2023. The outcome could set an early precedent for how far courts are willing to go in upholding the law — and what protections it ultimately provides for those who speak out about alleged misconduct. 'As more survivors came forward, the people who harmed them were increasingly using defamation lawsuits as weapons to try to silence them,' said Jessica Stender, deputy legal director at Equal Rights Advocates, one of the organizations that co-sponsored AB 933. 'When you see high-profile cases, like the Amber Heard–Johnny Depp case or in this case Blake Lively — survivors without money or fame are scared when they see what can happen to even a rich and famous person, and think, 'That could happen to me, and I can't take that chance.'' Lively's team, in a May 13 reply brief, defended the law's constitutionality and reiterated that her public statements were protected under AB 933. 'The First Amendment empowers legislatures to protect victims' First Amendment rights via fee-shifting rules designed to deter retaliatory litigation,' her attorneys wrote. The court has not yet ruled on Lively's motion to dismiss. If granted, it could deal a significant blow to Baldoni's countersuit — and shape how AB 933 is interpreted in future cases involving public allegations of misconduct. As other states look to adopt similar legislation, advocates say the outcome of the case could have ripple effects far beyond California. 'We want to be able to ensure that there is a social and legal environment where you can speak your truth and report sexual assault and harassment without fear of being sued,' said Dorchen Leidholdt, senior director of legal services at Sanctuary for Families, a New York–based nonprofit that provides legal and support services to survivors of gender-based violence. 'Legal retaliatory actions like the one brought by Mr. Baldoni and his team are doing enormous damage to victims, not just in California but across the country — affecting not only celebrity victims, but ordinary people.'
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Taylor Swift Free From Justin Baldoni Subpoena As Blake Lively Battle Heats Up
It seems Taylor Swift just had her "wildest dreams" come true: lawyers representing Justin Baldoni have dropped their subpoena against her, marking the latest update in his "It Ends With Us" lawsuit against costar Blake Lively. The "Look What You Made Me Do" singer's subpoena made headlines last week after Baldoni's team alleged that the "Gossip Girl" alum's lawyers had threatened to expose personal text messages from the singer in exchange for her public support. On May 22, Baldoni's legal team withdrew its subpoena against the 'Shake It Off' singer. Baldoni's lawyers had filed paperwork seeking information about how involved Swift was in the creation of the film, given speculation that she was involved in everything from script changes to casting. Deadline was the first to report the news, who noted that Swift's team responded to the legal update with 'no comment,' while they had yet to hear back from reps for Baldoni or Wayfarer Studios, who recently closed down their Wayfarer Foundation due to the mounting legal fees in their dueling lawsuits. As The Blast previously reported, Bryan Freedman, Baldoni's attorney, argued in court papers that he had received a tip from a 'source who is highly likely to have reliable information' about Swift's involvement in the film. Freedman claimed that Lively's attorney contacted Swift's attorney and 'demanded that Ms. Swift release a statement of support for Ms. Lively,' as well as "intimating that if Ms. Swift refused to do so, private text messages of a personal nature in Ms. Lively's possession would be released." Freedman argued that 'those communications' would come to light with the subpoena, which has now been withdrawn. Mike Gottlieb, an attorney for Blake Lively, told PEOPLE magazine that Baldoni's allegations were 'categorically false,' adding, 'We unequivocally deny all of these so-called allegations, which are cowardly sourced to supposed anonymous sources, and completely untethered from reality.' He went on to say, 'This is what we have come to expect from the Wayfarer parties' lawyers, who appear to love nothing more than shooting first, without any evidence, and with no care for the people they are harming in the process. We will imminently file motions with the court to hold these attorneys accountable for their misconduct here.' In an August 2024 interview with Gayle King on CBS Mornings, Lively thanked Swift for allowing her to use her song, 'My Tears Ricochet,' in the film's trailer and soundtrack. However, she also took things one step further, and insinuated that Swift's involvement extended just beyond her music. "She was with me throughout this whole process. So I think that, for better or worse, she, you know, experienced the whole thing with me," she said at the time. However, Swift's rep strongly denied the suggestion that the 'Love Story' singer was involved with the film shortly after news of the subpoena broke. "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," the singer's rep said in a statement. "The connection Taylor had to this film was permitting the use of one song, 'My Tears Ricochet,'' the statement continued. "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." It is unclear where their friendship currently stands. As The Blast previously reported, the "Cruel Summer" singer has reportedly 'halted' their friendship, with a source previously telling PEOPLE magazine, 'Taylor wants no part in this drama.' Other sources have indicated that, while they are still friends, they are "taking some space" as Lively's legal battle continues.
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
The Real Reason Travis Kelce Unfollowed Ryan Reynolds On Instagram Revealed
Is cutting ties with and Blake Lively? It sure looks that way. On Monday morning, fans of the NFL star noticed that he had unfollowed Reynolds on Instagram. The move sparked a social media firestorm, and now, the reason behind Travis Kelce's unfollow is coming to light. According to Page Six, the Kansas City Chiefs tight end recently unfollowed the "Deadpool" actor on Instagram because of the messy legal nightmare surrounding Blake Lively's "It Ends With Us" co-star . An unfollow usually sends a very loud message in celebrity land, but it's still unclear whether Kelce is officially ending the friendship or simply trying to avoid getting caught up in the downward publicity spiral engulfing Lively and Reynolds. It's also unknown how Taylor Swift feels about her boyfriend's social media move, but the "22" singer's feelings toward Lively have been complicated lately. Back in February, Page Six reported that Swift needed some "space" from the "Gossip Girl" alum after Baldoni's $400 million defamation lawsuit dragged her name into the mess. Sources at the time said Swift felt like a "pawn" in the legal battle. Bryan Freedman, Baldoni's lead attorney, even teased the possibility of Swift being dragged into the case, saying, "I don't know that we're going to depose Taylor Swift. I think that that's going to be probably a game time decision." And it's not just whispers anymore. Last week, the Daily Mail reported that Swift, along with Reynolds' longtime pal , are expected to be subpoenaed by Baldoni's lawyers as the case heads to trial next year. On December 20, 2024, Lively submitted a complaint to the California Civil Rights Department, alleging that Baldoni violated her privacy by "entering her makeup trailer uninvited while she was undressed," pressured her to lose weight just four months after giving birth, and orchestrated a PR campaign with a crisis firm "designed to 'destroy' Ms. Lively's reputation." Then, on January 16, 2025, Baldoni filed a federal lawsuit in New York against Lively, Reynolds, her publicist Leslie Sloane, and Sloane's firm Vision PR, alleging that his co-star "tormented" him, his family, and his partners, falsely accused him of sexual harassment, and used him as a "scapegoat" to deflect from the surrounding negative press. Baldoni also denied the sexual harassment claims, instead alleging that she "calculatingly devised" false stories to ruin his reputation and livelihood, took control of the film he was directing, and aimed to damage his career and Wayfarer Studios "if they did not bend to her incessant demands." He also launched a website, which features two main sections: The Amended Complaint and The Case Timeline. The Amended Complaint lays out the official legal claims brought by Baldoni and his production company against Lively and Reynolds, including allegations of defamation, extortion, and what they call "false allegations." The Case Timeline provides a detailed, step-by-step breakdown of major events, beginning with Baldoni's acquisition of the rights to "It Ends With Us" and leading up to the intensifying feud with Lively. Earlier this year, Freedman claimed that Swift was present alongside Baldoni, Lively, and Ryan Reynolds during a meeting regarding Lively's proposed script changes to "It Ends With Us," which is mentioned in Baldoni's lawsuit, although the suit only identifies the alleged attendee as "Taylor" without providing a last name. Insiders previously told Page Six that Lively apologized to Swift for the unwanted legal drama, but the pop icon is making moves to stay as far away from it as possible. "[She] is a strong woman, and she's not hiding from anything," an insider said in March. "Taylor is simply enjoying some alone time with Travis and being under the radar for a little bit." Swift and Kelce used to be thick as thieves with Lively and Reynolds, famously going on double dates and even having them show up on the sidelines to cheer for Kelce at Chiefs games. Now? It looks like the A-list double dates are on pause, and the unfollow button might just be Travis' way of saying he's officially out.
Yahoo
7 days ago
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Taylor Swift And Travis Kelce's Date Night Turn Heads Amid Legal Drama
and turned heads Friday night after being spotted grabbing a late-night bite at Harry's in West Palm Beach, Florida. The couple, who have kept a relatively low profile since the Super Bowl, were seen arriving just after 10 p.m., quietly making their way inside the upscale eatery. While the two weren't caught showing any overt PDA in the moment, a witness claims they entered hand-in-hand before Taylor Swift took the lead. Dressed for the warm Florida evening, the pop icon rocked a floral off-the-shoulder sundress with her hair in a relaxed bun, while Kelce opted for a laid-back black-and-white printed button-down. The duo, each with a drink in hand (Swift appeared to be sipping white wine and Kelce a house cocktail), were flanked by security as they made their way to a private round table. It's no surprise that as the couple made their way through the restaurant, they literally turned heads with diners swiveling in their seats, doing double-takes as they tried to confirm whether it was truly Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce strolling past their table. The photos were first obtained by TMZ. Their public appearance comes on the heels of major legal developments involving Swift's inner circle. Lawyers representing have officially dropped their subpoena against Swift in his ongoing legal battle with "It Ends With Us" co-star . Baldoni's team initially sought details about Swift's rumored behind-the-scenes involvement in the film's development, from casting decisions to script edits. In a letter to the judge obtained by PEOPLE Magazine, Baldoni's lawyer, Bryan Freedman, 'demanded that [Taylor Swift] release a statement of support for [Blake Lively],' as well as "intimating that if [Taylor Swift] refused to do so, private text messages of a personal nature in [Blake Lively's] possession would be released." However, after receiving the information they needed through other means, the subpoena was withdrawn on May 22. The singer's quiet evening with Kelce comes amid whispers of tension behind the scenes involving others in her inner circle. Sources say Swift feels "exploited" by former friend Lively, who she believes leaned on their personal relationship during the legal feud. While Lively has denied the claims, insiders suggest Swift is glad to be stepping away from the situation and the friendship. 'Right now, if Taylor had one wish, it would be that she never met Blake,' a source close to the singer revealed. "Although there were good times, the issues around the Baldoni case have outweighed them. When Taylor looks back, she sees all the red flags she missed. It just wasn't worth the stress.' The Kansas City Chiefs' tight end made headlines earlier this week after being spotted in Miami on Tuesday, where he caught attention for an unexpected reason. The NFL star was seen removing his black T-shirt before stepping into the back of a car, revealing a noticeably hairy back and sparking a wave of playful reactions online, including from NFL quarterback Kirk Cousins. 'God bless Taylor Swift for being good with that,' Cousins joked to E! News. 'That's awesome. Good for her.' This isn't the first time Travis's hairy bod made headlines. Last year, shared a story about his brother's notably hairy physique on an episode of their 'New Heights' podcast. Kelce, who's currently staying at a $20 million estate in Boca Raton, seems to be a calming presence as the "Love Story" singer enjoys some downtime following her record-breaking "Eras Tour." And with the legal drama fading into the rearview mirror, this rare public date night might just signal a new chapter, both personally and professionally, for the pop superstar.
