Background of the Case
Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni, who worked together on the film adaptation of It Ends with Us, are embroiled in a high-profile legal battle. Lively filed a lawsuit in December 2024, accusing Baldoni of sexual harassment, unprofessional conduct, and orchestrating a retaliatory smear campaign. Baldoni has denied these allegations and responded with a countersuit, alleging defamation and extortion, naming not just Lively but also her husband Ryan Reynolds and their publicity team.
Taylor Swift’s Involvement
Taylor Swift has been subpoenaed as a potential witness in this ongoing legal dispute. The primary reason for her involvement, according to Baldoni’s legal filings, is an alleged incident where Lively and Reynolds, with Swift present, pressured Baldoni to accept Lively’s rewrites for the film’s script. Baldoni claims that a meeting at Lively and Reynolds’ penthouse, where Swift praised Lively’s script, created implicit pressure for him to comply with Lively’s creative direction. Text messages cited in the filings reference Swift and Reynolds as Lively’s “dragons,” suggesting they were used to bolster Lively’s influence during script discussions.
Despite these claims, Swift’s spokesperson has emphasized that her only connection to the film was licensing her song “My Tears Ricochet” for use in the soundtrack-a contribution shared with 19 other artists. The spokesperson further clarified that Swift never visited the set, was not involved in casting or creative decisions, and did not see the film until after its public release. They characterized the subpoena as an attempt to generate sensational headlines by leveraging Swift’s celebrity status, rather than focusing on the substantive issues of the case.
Legal and Public Reactions
Blake Lively’s legal team has strongly contested the relevance of Swift’s testimony. Lively’s attorney, Mike Gottlieb, has argued that Swift-and other celebrities like Hugh Jackman, who has also been mentioned as a possible witness-have no direct knowledge of the core issues in the case, which center on Lively’s allegations of harassment and workplace misconduct. Gottlieb criticized the move as a publicity stunt, asserting that federal courts do not tolerate the unnecessary involvement of celebrities for the sake of media attention.
Baldoni’s legal team, on the other hand, maintains that the involvement of Swift and Reynolds is well-documented through messages and other evidence, and they argue that their testimonies could be relevant to understanding the dynamics behind the scenes.
Current Status and Next Steps
The trial, titled Lively v. Wayfarer Studios et al., is scheduled to begin in March 2026. Pretrial discovery is ongoing, and it remains uncertain whether Swift will ultimately be required to testify. Lively’s legal team continues to push back against the inclusion of celebrity witnesses, insisting that the case should focus on the alleged workplace misconduct rather than devolving into a media spectacle.
Summary Table: Key Points
| Aspect | Details |
|---|---|
| Parties Involved | Blake Lively (plaintiff), Justin Baldoni (defendant/counter-plaintiff), Ryan Reynolds, Taylor Swift |
| Swift’s Connection | Licensed one song for the film; not involved in production or creative decisions |
| Reason for Subpoena | Alleged involvement in pressuring Baldoni to accept script changes at a meeting |
| Spokesperson’s Response | Subpoena is “tabloid clickbait”; Swift has no relevant knowledge of the dispute |
| Legal Team’s Position | Lively’s attorney says Swift’s testimony is irrelevant; Baldoni’s team insists otherwise |
| Trial Date | March 2026 |
Taylor Swift’s subpoena in the Lively–Baldoni case has generated significant media attention, but her direct involvement in the underlying dispute appears minimal, limited to the licensing of a song. Both Swift’s and Lively’s representatives argue that the subpoena is an attempt to draw headlines rather than a necessary legal step. The court will ultimately decide whether her testimony is warranted as the trial approaches.
