Justin Baldoni and his legal team doesn’t seem to be stopping in the legal battle against Blake Lively.
Baldoni and Lively’s legal teams are clashing over what should stay private in their ongoing courtroom battle, and let’s just say—they are not on the same page.
Lively’s attorneys, on Feb. 20, requested an “Attorney’s Eyes Only” category in their proposed protective order, arguing that this case—one involving “high-profile individuals and allegations of sexual harassment”—requires extra privacy.
In a letter to Judge Lewis J. Liman, her team expressed concerns about potential “threats” and “possible witness intimidation” if certain details became public.
Baldoni’s legal team, however, isn’t buying it.
In their Feb. 25 response, they questioned why Lively is suddenly so protective of information.
“Given how actively the Lively Parties have publicized and litigated Ms. Lively’s claims in the media, we are surprised to now learn how vehemently she wants to prevent the public from accessing material and relevant evidence,” they wrote.
According to Baldoni’s lawyers, the court’s suggested protective order is already sufficient, and Lively’s proposed changes are unnecessary.
They argued, “Ms. Lively has already publicized the alleged details of the so-called ‘harassment’ in her Amended Complaint,” adding that she “lacks a ‘good faith’ belief” that anything is so sensitive it warrants additional privacy measures.
Not one to let that slide, Lively’s attorneys fired back the same day, calling Baldoni’s argument misleading.
“Certain online content creators who frequently parrot the Wayfarer Parties’ line … have used similar misleading accusations,” they wrote, claiming that this kind of “manufactured echo chamber” is precisely why extra privacy protections are necessary.
At the heart of the case are allegations from two female co-stars from It Ends With Us, who Lively’s team claims are willing to testify against Baldoni.
These witnesses weren’t named in the amended complaint, with her lawyers citing concerns about protecting “innocent bystanders” in what they describe as a “dangerous climate of threats, harassment, and intimidation.”
However, according to Lively’s legal team, the witnesses have given her permission to share their communications and have agreed to testify.
Baldoni’s attorney, Bryan Freedman, seems unconvinced. In a statement, he claimed the two unnamed co-stars “are clearly no longer willing to come forward or publicly support her claims.”
With both sides firmly digging in, it looks like this battle is far from over.
