Taylor Swift Excluded From Baldoni-Lively Narrative, as Subpoena Is Withdrawn

Justin Baldoni‘s lawyers have withdrawn a subpoena sent to Taylor Swift and her legal team, after the firm objected that it amounted to an “unwarranted fishing expedition.”

Attorneys for Swift and Blake Lively — who are friends — had filed motions to quash the subpoena, which sought communications between their respective legal teams.

Baldoni is suing Lively, his “It Ends With Us” co-star, and her husband Ryan Reynolds, alleging that they tried destroy his career with false allegations of sexual harassment. Lively has sued Baldoni and a cast of publicists on the grounds that they launched an online whisper campaign against her in retaliation for her harassment complaints.

In a statement on Thursday, Lively’s spokesperson said that Baldoni had sought to exploit Swift’s celebrity to distract from the real issues in the case.

“We are pleased that Justin Baldoni and the Wayfarer Parties have withdrawn their harassing subpoenas to Taylor Swift and her law firm,” the spokesperson said. “We supported the efforts of Taylor’s team to quash these inappropriate subpoenas directed to her counsel and we will continue to stand up for any third party who is unjustly harassed or threatened in the process.”

Swift was referenced in Baldoni’s lawsuit as a “megacelebrity friend” of Lively’s, who came to her defense in a creative conflict. Baldoni was both the director and co-star of the film. According to his allegations, he felt pressured by Swift and Reynolds — whom Lively called her “dragons” — to accede to Lively’s script changes.

The subpoenas to Swift and her law firm — filed on May 8 and April 28, respectively — do not appear to be connected to that particular claim.

According to a court filing from Bryan Freedman, Baldoni’s lead attorney, he was instead looking for evidence that Lively’s lawyer had threatened to release texts between Lively and Swift unless Swift issued a statement of support for Lively.

Freedman alleged that he received a voicemail on Feb. 14 from “a person very closely linked to Taylor Swift.” In a subsequent conversation, this person, whom Freedman declined to identify, claimed that Lively’s lawyer had demanded that Swift post a social media statement in support of Lively, and warned that he could release 10 years of texts between the two stars. According to Freedman’s version of events, Swift’s lawyer then accused Lively’s lawyer of extortion and ended the call.

The person also claimed that Lively had urged Swift to delete their text messages several months earlier, according to Freedman.

Freedman also claimed that Swift’s lawyer had memorialized the allegedly extortionate conversation in a letter to Lively’s lawyer, which he was seeking to obtain through the subpoena.

Lively’s lawyers called Freedman’s allegations “unequivocally and demonstrably false,” and argued that the sole purpose of the court filing was to publicize scandalous claims through a means by which they would be shielded from defamation liability.

Attorneys for both Swift and Lively also argued that the allegations were irrelevant to the claims and defenses actually at issue in the case.

In the court filing, Freedman indicated that the motions to quash would likely become moot, as negotiations were underway with Swift’s law firm, Venable LLP. Purportedly, those negotiations have resulted in information being provided voluntarily, obviating the need for the subpoenas.

“The Baldoni and Wayfarer team have tried to put Taylor Swift, a woman who has been an inspiration for tens of millions across the globe, at the center of this case since day one,” Lively’s spokesperson said. “Faced with having to justify themselves in federal court, they folded. At some point they will run out of distractions from the actual claims of sexual harassment and retaliation they are facing.”

A spokesperson for Swift previously dismissed the subpoena as a bid for “tabloid clickbait.”

“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 spokesperson said.

Judge Lewis Liman previously granted Lively’s motion to strike Freedman’s allegations from the court record. The judge also threatened to sanction Freedman in the event of further missteps.