A federal judge has shut down Justin Baldoni’s eleventh-hour attempt to depose Taylor Swift in his escalating legal battle with Blake Lively.
Court Dismisses Baldoni’s Swift Deposition Request
U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman delivered his ruling Friday, blocking Justin Baldoni and his Wayfarer Studios co-defendants from questioning the superstar. The judge made it clear: they’d blown their chance by dragging their feet while gearing up for trial over Blake Lively’s explosive sexual harassment and retaliation claims from the It Ends With Us set.
Judge Liman did throw Lively a bone, granting her an extra 10 days to depose Baldoni and two others after the defendants slow-walked document production. But Swift? That ship had sailed. The court found Baldoni’s team couldn’t make a compelling case for “good cause” to drag Swift’s testimony into overtime.
Timing Issues Sink Defendants’ Legal Strategy
Judge Liman didn’t mince words about Baldoni’s May 2025 subpoena attempt that went nowhere. The defendants couldn’t prove they’d made any serious effort to reschedule Swift’s deposition, suggesting their problems were more about poor planning than actual roadblocks.
“The Wayfarer parties have offered no evidence of renewed subpoena service to Swift,” Liman wrote in his decision. “Scheduling difficulties do not excuse why this deposition could not have been arranged sooner. Having failed to show appropriate diligence, their requested extension is denied.”
He Said, She Said Over Swift’s Availability
The legal drama reached peak absurdity Thursday when Baldoni’s attorney, Ellyn S. Garofalo, fired off a letter claiming Swift had agreed to testify but couldn’t make it before October 20, 2025. Swift’s lawyer, J. Douglas Baldridge, quickly shot back, setting the record straight: Swift never agreed to anything and only mentioned her packed schedule if forced to appear.
That packed schedule? Swift’s reportedly juggling her engagement to Travis Kelce and promoting her hotly anticipated album The Life of a Showgirl, dropping October 3.
The Root of the Conflict: Lively’s Harassment Allegations
Blake Lively, 38, hasn’t pulled any punches in her accusations against Justin Baldoni, 41, and Wayfarer Studios. She’s alleging sexual harassment and a calculated campaign to destroy her reputation during It Ends With Us production. The claims paint a disturbing picture, including an incident where Baldoni allegedly went off-script during a slow dance scene with an inappropriate gesture and pushed for graphic sexual content between their characters.
Things got messier when Baldoni fired back with his own defamation lawsuit, dragging Swift into the mess by claiming she backed Lively’s script demands. His legal team even cited text messages where Swift and Ryan Reynolds were described as “dragons” protecting Lively’s interests.
Lively’s Legal Team Fires Back at Media Circus
Lively’s attorneys didn’t hold back in condemning what they see as Baldoni’s publicity stunt. They’ve accused his team of showing “astounding” disrespect for Swift’s privacy while trying to turn the litigation into a media spectacle.
“The Wayfarer defendants have repeatedly tried to bring Ms. Swift into this litigation as part of a relentless media strategy,” wrote Lively’s attorney Michael J. Gottlieb. He hammered home that Baldoni’s team never bothered explaining why Swift’s testimony was even relevant, instead using her name to grab headlines.
Swift’s Camp Pushes Back on Production Claims
Swift’s representatives have been crystal clear about her non-involvement in the film. They’ve categorically denied she ever stepped foot on set, influenced casting decisions, contributed to the score, or viewed any cuts. Her team dismissed Baldoni’s subpoenas as transparent attempts to exploit Swift’s celebrity status for tabloid coverage rather than focusing on the actual legal issues at hand.
This legal slugfest first made headlines following a New York Times investigation last year that exposed Lively’s complaint to California’s Civil Rights Department, revealing the full scope of her allegations against Baldoni and his production company.
