Judge Rules on Blake Lively's Privacy Request as 'He Said, She Said' Documentary Premieres

This is a gossipy, in-depth exploration of the ongoing legal battle between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni following their collaboration on "It Ends With Us." Written in the voice of fictional gossip columnist Vivian Steele, it details Lively's sexual misconduct allegations against Baldoni, his $400 million countersuit, and how both stars are managing their public images during the controversy. The piece discusses the documentary being made about their feud, SNL's references to their conflict, privacy battles over celebrity text messages (including those involving Taylor Swift), and court rulings about protective orders. Throughout, the narrator maintains a sassy, insider tone while analyzing how both stars are attempting to maintain their carefully crafted public personas amid the scandal that won't reach trial until March 2026. https://www.quietperiodplease.com/

This content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to Celebrity Confidential, where we get up close and
personal with the juiciest dramas unfolding in Tinseltown. I'm your host,
Vivian Steel, and today we're diving deep into what might
be the most explosive Hollywood feud of the year, A
saga so scandalous it's already getting its own documentary before
the trial even begins. Darlings, cancel your plans and refill

(00:21):
that wineglass, because the Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni legal
battle is serving up more drama than an entire season
of Gossip Girl, and yes, the irony that Blake starred
in that show is absolutely delicious. What started as a
seemingly picture perfect film collaboration has transformed into a four
hundred million dollar legal nightmare, complete with allegations of sexual misconduct,

(00:45):
smear campaigns, and enough celebrity cameos to fill an Awards
show red carpet. Let's start by dishing on the breaking news.
Shall we as we speak? Literally? Today March seventeenth, a
documentary titled He Said, She Said? Blake Lively Versus Justin
Baldoni is premiering in the UK this ninety minute fast

(01:07):
Turnaround Special from ITN Productions will make its way to
American screens on March thirty first via Investigation Discovery, where
it will be renamed in Dispute Lively v. Baldoni because
apparently American audiences need their titles more straightforward. Bless their hearts,
and if you miss it on cable, don't worry, It'll

(01:29):
be streaming on Max and Discovery Plus faster than you
can say legal objection. According to the absolutely mouthwatering press release,
this documentary will examine the legal complaint brought against Justin
Baldoni by Blake Lively, alleging he engaged in sexual misconduct
on the set of his film It Ends with Us
and hired a PR firm to engage in an online

(01:50):
smear campaign against her to keep her quiet. Juicy, that's
putting it mildly. The release adds that Baldoni denies the
allegation and has responded with a four hundred million dollar
countersuit accusing her of defamation, with the trial not scheduled
until March twenty twenty six. Yes, you read that right.

(02:11):
We have an entire year of this drama ahead of us.
The documentary promises to examine the evidence on both sides,
and the response to the dispute on social media. Ian Russell,
head of International at ITN Productions, calls the special a
timely and in depth telling of the Hollywood story which
has captured the global zeitgeist, and honestly, can we argue

(02:37):
this saga has everything. Beautiful people, serious allegations, massive financial stakes,
a list adjacent players, social media warfare, and enough legal
maneuvers to make suits look like a children's show for
those who've somehow been living under a rock or gasp,
taking a social media detox. Let me recap how we

(02:58):
got here, because the timeline of this feud is as
twisted as a telenovella plot. Back on December twentieth, America's
Golden Girl, Blake Lively, she of the perfect hair and
enviable marriage to Ryan Reynolds, filed a complaint against Baldoni
with the California Civil Rights Department. Not satisfied with just
one legal action, go big or go home, right, she

(03:21):
formally sued him eleven days later in federal court in
New York. The allegations that Baldoni, who not only co
starred with Lively in It Ends with Us, but directed
the hit film through his production company, Wayfarer Studios, engaged
in sexual misconduct on set. But wait, there's more. She

(03:42):
also claimed he hired a PR firm to conduct an
online smear campaign against her to keep her quiet about
his alleged behavior. If that sounds like the plot of
a psychological thriller, it's because it basically is life imitating
art in the most dramatic fashion possible. Baldoni, looking at
these accusations and apparently thinking challenge accepted, fired back with

(04:03):
a four hundred million dollar countersuit in January, accusing Lively
of defamation. But because no Hollywood drama is complete without
a star studded supporting cast, Baldoni named Ryan Reynolds, Yes
Deadpool himself, Lively's publicist Leslie Sloane, and Sloane's PR firm
Vision Pr in his lawsuit, claiming civil extortion and defamation.

(04:27):
As if that weren't enough, He's also suing The New
York Times for two hundred fifty million dollars for libel
after they published Lively's complaint on December twenty first. The
man is throwing around nine figure lawsuits like their confetti
at a New Year's Eve party. The legal drama has
had more twists and turns than the Mulholland Drive. Just
last week, on March thirteenth, Judge Lewis J. Lyman partially

(04:50):
granted Lively's request for a modified protective order. This legal
move was aimed at preventing private details from leaking to
the media, because heaven forbid, we got gossip columnists get
our hands on too much information. The judge ruled that
while certain confidential materials will remain protected, an attorney's eyes
only designation can only be applied if their disclosure is

(05:12):
highly likely to cause a significant business, commercial, financial, or
privacy injury. Translation for those of us without law degrees,
some of the juiciest bits might still make their way
into the public eye, but the truly explosive private details
could stay under wraps. Speaking of the public eye, this
feud has already transcended courtroom drama and entered the realm

(05:35):
of pop culture phenomenon. Saturday Night Live couldn't resist poking
fun at the situation during a recent weekend Update segment.
Colin Jost, who, in an added layer of celebrity interconnectedness
that you simply couldn't script, is married to Ryan Reynolds's
ex wife, Scarlet Johansson cracked a joke about Ukrainian President

(05:55):
Voladimir Zelenski trying to salvage his relationship with President Trump
being like Justin Baldoni saying I'd love to work with
Blake again. The shade of it all and this jab
came just two weeks after Lively and Reynolds made an
appearance on SNL's fiftieth anniversary special on February sixteenth, talk
about awkward timing. During that SNL appearance, Reynolds and Lively

(06:20):
seemed to acknowledge the elephant in the room, albeit subtly.
When Reynolds stood up to ask a question during a
bit with Tina Fey and Amy Poehler, Fay simply asked him,
how's it going. Reynolds pretended to appear jittery as Lively
looked up at him and jokingly responded, great, Why what

(06:40):
have you heard? It was a calculated moment of self
awareness that acknowledged the swirling drama without actually addressing it
head on, a classic celebrity pr move if I've ever
seen one. What makes this legal battle particularly fascinating is
how it's pulling back the curtain on the typically pristine
public images. Both stars have cultivated over the years. Lively,

(07:03):
with her picture perfect Instagram feed full of baking sessions
and adorable family moments with her four children, James ten,
Inez eight, Betty five, and ol In two. Yes, I
keep track of these things, has built a brand around
being America's relatable yet aspirational sweetheart. Just this past weekend,

(07:24):
as if to reinforce this image amid the legal chaos,
she shared snaps of a family baking session with Reynolds
and their children decorating horse shaped cookies and cupcakes. The
family that bakes together stays sick on buttercream together, she
captioned one of the photos, set to the tune of
all the Pretty Little Horses. The timing of these wholesome

(07:46):
domestic posts amid such a high stakes legal battle feels
almost too perfect to be coincidental. A masterclass in image
management during crisis. Meanwhile, Baldoni, who rose to fame on
Jane the Virgin and has built his brand around being
a thoughtful feminist. Ally, he literally directed a film based
on a Colleen Hoover novel about domestic abuse. Darling's now

(08:08):
finds himself accused of the very behaviors he's publicly stood against.
His ted talk about redefining masculinity has millions of views,
and he's positioned himself as an advocate for women's stories
through his directorial choices. It's the kind of ironic twist
that screenwriters dream about, but publicists have nightmares over a
potential brand catastrophe that could unravel years of careful reputation building.

(08:32):
The legal battle has taken another fascinating turn in recent weeks,
as both sides argue over access to private text messages.
Because in Hollywood, your phone is basically a ticking time
bomb of potential scandals. Lively and Reynold's attorneys have argued
that Baldoni should not have accessed the couple's private texts
with other celebrities, fearing they might leak to the public.

(08:55):
During a dial in hearing on March sixth, Lively's attorney
Meryl Konant Gevernski, told Judge Lineman that there is a
significant chance of irreparable harm if marginal conversations with high
profile individuals with no relevance to the case were to
fall into wrong hands, and who might those high profile
individuals include none other than Taylor Swift, who was specifically

(09:16):
mentioned in Baldoni's complaint against Lively and Reynolds. Yes, the
Taylor Swift, Queen of the music industry, girlfriend of NFL
star Travis Kelcey, and longtime bestie of Lively. The plot
thickens faster than a poorly mixed protein shake. Swift hasn't
publicly commented on the situation yet, but her mere peripheral

(09:39):
involvement adds another layer of star power to this already
dazzling legal constellation. During that same hearing, Lively's attorneys argued
that they do need access to industry relevant materials that
would help clear our client's name, while Baldoni's team insisted
that Lively's attorneys should be required to file petitions for

(10:00):
access to specific sensitive materials. A spokesperson for Lively later
clarified to people that the dispute is about whether a
narrow category of already non public information should be accessible
only to attorneys rather than the parties. That type of
provision is standard civil cases legal speak aside, what we're
witnessing is a high stakes battle over privacy and information control,

(10:24):
with both sides trying to protect their narratives while gaining
access to potentially damaging information about the other. The judge
has already shut down portions of Lively's subpoena for Baldoni's
phone records in court documents released on February twenty eighth,
determining the request to be overly intrusive and disproportionate to
the needs of the case. In his ruling, he noted

(10:45):
that Lively has identified no means to segregate those numbers
that may have some relevance to her case from those
numbers that would have no relevance and would reveal sensitive
personal information. In response, Baldoni's lawyer, Brian Friedman, said, the
judge put a stop to the actress producer's egregious attempt
to invade our client's privacy. Meanwhile, a spokesperson for Lively

(11:09):
claimed that Baldoni's attorney ran into court to keep secret
the phone records of who Baldoni and his associates were
calling during their retaliatory campaign. The back and forth pr
statements from both legal teams have become almost as entertaining
as the case itself. The case has grown so contentious
that both sides have opted out of what they described

(11:30):
as inappropriate and premature mediation. In a February thirteenth letter
filed in New York Federal Court, attorneys for both Lively
and Baldoni indicated that both cases will go to trial
as scheduled in March twenty twenty six. Yes, you read
that right. We have an entire year of delicious legal

(11:51):
drama before this case even sees the inside of a courtroom.
The entertainment value alone might be worth more than the
four hundred million dollars in damn Baldoni is seeking. Despite
the legal storm swirling around her, Lively hasn't retreated from
the spotlight. Just this weekend, she attended the south By
Southwest Festival premiere of Another Simple Favor in Austin, Texas.

(12:15):
The actress appeared in high spirits, greeting fans and expressing
excitement about reprising her role as Emily Nelson in Paul
Feig's sequel to the twenty eighteen comedy Mystery. But even there,
the Baldoni drama followed her like a shadow, with a
protester briefly appearing on the red carpet holding a sign
that read justice for Justin Baldoni. Blake lied before being

(12:38):
escorted out by security. You simply cannot escape drama in Hollywood, darlings,
it follows the stars, Like designer perfume. The SXSW appearance
also sparked rumors of tension between Lively and her co
star Anna Kendrick, adding yet another potential layer to this
drama Lasagna. When asked by Entertainment Tonight about working with

(12:59):
Kendrick again, Lively responded enthusiastically, Oh, it's the best. I'm
so happy to be here. In another clip, Kendrick gave
a more reserved response, saying, oh, you know, before continuing
to interact with fans. This exchange immediately fueled speculation of
a rift, but director Paul Fie quickly shut down the rumors,

(13:21):
responding to online speculation with a blunt um, you're wrong.
The fact that we're even discussing a potential second feud
shows just how much the Baldoni situation has primed us
to look for cracks in Lively's Hollywood relationships. Once the
dramadam breaks, every interaction becomes suspect. In February, Lively filed

(13:42):
an amended complaint that turned up the heat even further,
alleging Baldoni made two female cast members uncomfortable on set,
adding new dimensions to her original allegations. This strategic legal
move expanded the scope of her claims and potentially brought
in other witnesses to support her care Meanwhile, Judge Lyman
has warned both sides to stop litigating the case in

(14:05):
the media, cautioning that he may move up the trial
if the public posturing continues. But let's be honest. In
today's media landscape, keeping high profile legal battles out of
the public eye is about as likely as finding a
celebrity who hasn't tried facial fillers. It's theoretically possible, but
I wouldn't bet my burkin on it. What's particularly interesting

(14:26):
about this entire affair is how it reflects the changing
landscape of celebrity legal battles in the social media age.
Gone are the days when legal documents would be filed
quietly and maybe get a small mention in the trade papers. Now,
every filing, every courtroom appearance, every statement from legal teams
becomes instant fodder for social media discussions, think pieces, and yes,

(14:49):
even documentaries. The court of public opinion often moves much
faster than the actual judicial system, creating a parallel trial
where reputations can be made or destroyed long before a
verdict is reached. The allegations at the heart of this
case are, of course serious ones. Lively has accused Baldoni
of sexual harassment and creating a hostile work environment, claims

(15:12):
that would normally be treated with the gravity they deserve,
but in the celebrity ecosystem, these allegations have become just
another chapter in Hollywood's ongoing narrative of power struggles and
personality clashes. The fact that a documentary examining this case
is being rushed to air before any substantial legal proceedings
have even begun speaks volumes about how we consume celebrity

(15:34):
conflicts as entertainment. This case is also fascinating because of
the stunning amounts of money involved. Baldoni's four hundred million
dollar lawsuit against Lively, Reynolds, and their publicity team isn't
just a random number. It represents the high financial stakes
of modern celebrity reputations. Add to that his two hundred
and fifty million dollar lawsuit against The New York Times,

(15:56):
and we're looking at over half a billion dollars in
claim damages. Whether these figures are realistic or simply meant
to generate headlines is beside the point. They underscore how
valuable personal brands have become in the entertainment industry. A
star's reputation isn't just about ego. It's a business asset
worth potentially hundreds of millions. The timing of this legal

(16:18):
battle is particularly interesting given that It Ends with Us
was a major commercial success based on Colleen Hoover's best
selling novel about domestic abuse. The film resonated with audiences
and performed well at the box office. What should have
been a career highlight for both stars has instead become
overshadowed by their personal and legal conflict. The irony that

(16:42):
a film about abuse has led to allegations of misconduct
is not lost on industry observers or fans of the book.
Lively's request for a protective order also highlights the unique
challenges celebrities face in legal proceedings. During a hearing last week,
Lively's attorney cited concerns about privacy, stating that given how
the case has unfolded so far, there are one hundred

(17:05):
million reasons for these parties to leak information because the
pr value is greater than complying with the court's orders.
This candid acknowledgment of how media exposure can influence legal
strategies offers a rare glimpse into the calculus behind celebrity
legal battles. It's not just about winning in court, it's
about winning in the court of public opinion. In response

(17:27):
to Lively's request for stricter protections, Baldoni's team pushed back,
arguing that the current protective order is sufficient. They also
claimed that Baldoni has been receiving violent messages similar to
those Lively claimed to be receiving. When private parties were
wrongfully accused by Lively and her paid team of wrongdoing,

(17:47):
They received continuous death threats and visits to private homes
where young children reside. No one should have to face that,
especially private parties who do not have means for security.
Detail Doni's team stated, this suggests that the public backlash
is affecting both sides, turning what should be a legal
matter into a potentially dangerous situation for all involved. On

(18:11):
February twenty fifth, Baldoni's lawyers made another explosive claim, suggesting
that Lively is trying to prevent the public from accessing evidence.
Given how actively the Lively parties have publicized and litigated
Miss 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. This accusation

(18:34):
implies that Lively's team is strategically controlling what information reaches
the public, a serious charge in a case that's already
being tried as much in the media as in the courtroom.
The involvement of Reynolds in this case adds another fascinating dimension.
As one of Hollywood's most bankable stars and a social
media darling known for his witty online presence, Reynolds now

(18:56):
finds himself drawn into a legal battle that could potentially
affect his own care carefully cultivated brand. His marriage to
Lively has been portrayed as one of Hollywood's most solid
and adorable relationships, with the couple frequently engaging in playful
social media banter that endears them to fans. Now that
relationship is being dragged into a legal spotlight that neither

(19:17):
of them likely wanted. Baldoni's countersuit specifically claims that Reynolds
was involved in the alleged defamation and extortion, serious allegations
against an a liss star who generally enjoys positive public perception.
How Reynolds navigates this situation will be interesting to watch,
as he's known for controlling his narrative through humor and

(19:38):
carefully calculated public appearances. So far, he's largely stayed out
of the spotlight regarding this case, letting legal teams and
spokespeople do the talking. The inclusion of Taylor Swift's name
in Baldoni's complaint is particularly juicy given her status as
not just a global superstar, but also a close friend
of Lively and Reynolds. Swift has been known to include

(20:01):
references to the couple and their children in her music,
and they've supported her publicly at concerts and events. While
Swift isn't directly involved in the legal proceedings, the mere
mention of her name suggests that Baldoni's team believes communications
between her and the Lively Reynolds household might contain relevant information.
It's a celebrity trifecta that gossip columnists can only dream of,

(20:24):
as both Lively and Baldoni continue their respective careers amid
this legal battle. The contrast in their public approaches is striking.
Lively seems to be maintaining her usual social media presence,
sharing idyllic family moments and promoting her new film its
business as usual, at least on the surface, a strategy

(20:45):
that suggests confidence and an unwillingness to let the legal
issues define her public image. Baldoni, meanwhile, has been less visible,
perhaps focusing on the legal fight rather than public perception management.
The documentary he Said, She's said, Blake Lively versus Justin
Baldoni represents a new frontier in how we consume celebrity

(21:05):
legal drama. Rather than waiting for the trial to play out,
media companies are capitalizing on the immediate interest, creating content
that analyzes the situation in real time. Whether this documentary
will provide genuine insights or simply rehash publicly available information
remains to be seen, but its very existence speaks to

(21:26):
our cultural fascination with celebrity conflict. As we await both
the documentary and the eventual trial, it's worth considering what
this case says about how we view celebrity conflicts. There's
an undeniable entertainment value to watching famous, beautiful people engage
in public disputes. But behind the headlines are real allegations

(21:46):
that deserve serious consideration. Sexual misconduct claims shouldn't be reduced
to gossip fodder, yet the celebrity element inevitably transforms these
serious matters into entertainment. For Lively in Baldoni, this league
battle represents a crossroads in their careers. Regardless of the
legal outcome, their public images have already been affected. Hollywood

(22:08):
loves a redemption arc, so don't be surprised if whoever
comes out worse from the legal proceedings eventually finds their
way back into the industry's good graces with a carefully
orchestrated comeback. But for now, both stars are navigating treacherous waters,
trying to protect their reputations while fighting a legal battle
that has captured public imagination. The modified protective order granted

(22:31):
by Judge Lyman on March thirteenth acknowledges the unique challenges
of this case. In his ruling, the judge noted the
risk of industry gossip, stating, where confidential information is not
disclosed to the media, it may spread by gossip and
innuendo to those in the tight artistic community in a
position to do harm to one or the other of
the parties, but in a manner that might not be

(22:54):
readily and immediately detected. This rare acknowledgment of Hollywood's gossip
ecosystem shows how different celebrity legal cases are from ordinary litigation.
Reputation damage can occur through whispers and insinuations long before
any verdict is reached. In response to the ruling, Baldoni's attorney,
Brian Friedman, issued a statement claiming that the defense never

(23:16):
sought the deeply personal information that Lively claimed needed extra protection.
We are fully in agreement with the court's decision to
provide a narrow scope of protections to categories such as
private mental health records and personal security measures that have
never been of interest to us, as opposed to Miss
Lively's exceedingly overbroad demand for documents for a two point

(23:37):
five year period of time, which the court rightly quashed.
He added that they remain focused on the necessary communications
that will directly contradict Miss Lively's unfounded accusations. This statement
frames Baldoni's team as reasonable and focused solely on relevant
evidence contrasting with the implication that Lively is overreaching in

(23:59):
her protective request GISTs. The looming trial date of March
twenty twenty six means this saga will continue to unfold
over the next year, with likely many more legal filings,
public statements, and media analysis to come. For both stars,
this extended timeline means living with the uncertainty and public
scrutiny for much longer than they might have hoped. For

(24:21):
us gossip officionados, it means a gift that keeps on
giving a Hollywood drama with real stakes, big names, and
enough legal complexity to keep us guessing. In the meantime,
both stars appear to be continuing with their respective careers
as if determined not to let the legal battle define them.
Lively's appearance at SXSW and her continued social media presence

(24:43):
suggests she's focusing on moving forward professionally despite the legal cloud.
Baldoni is presumably working on his next project while his
legal team fights his battles in court. But make no mistake,
beneath the surface, this is a high stakes clash that
could have lasting implications for both stars careers and reputations
as for who will emerge victorious from this legal gladiatorial combat.

(25:07):
It's far too early to tell, but in the court
of public opinion, the battle lines seem to be forming already.
Every social media post, every public appearance, every legal filing
is being scrutinized for clues about who's telling the truth
and who isn't. In this parallel trial by media, evidence
is less important than narrative and perception, often Trump's reality.

(25:30):
In the meantime, we'll all be watching, commenting, theorizing, and yes, gossiping,
because that's what we do when our favorite celebrities fall out.
We pick sides, We analyze every statement, We look for
hidden meanings and Instagram posts and red carpet comments. It's
the modern equivalent of Roman Bred and Circuses, only with
better outfits and more expensive lawyers. So buckle up, darlings.

(25:54):
The Blake Lively versus Justin Baldoni saga is just getting started.
And if the past few months or any indication, we're
in for a wild ride. Whether you're team Blake or
team Justin, one thing is certain. This is Hollywood drama
at its finest, and I'll be here for every twist
and turn, armed with my insider knowledge, my sharp tongue,
and of course, a perfectly chilled glass of champagne. Thanks

(26:18):
for listening, babes. Please subscribe for more juicy gossip and
Hollywood deep dives. This episode was brought to you by
Quiet Please Podcast Networks. For more content like this, please
go to Quiet Please dot ai and until next time,
keep it scandalous.