Comprehensive Timeline and Analysis of the Blake Lively & Justin Baldoni Legal Dispute
Note: This article is regularly updated with new developments as the case unfolds.
Background
Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni’s legal battle started after they worked together on the 2024 film It Ends With Us.
Lively accused Baldoni of sexual harassment and claimed he and his team led a smear campaign to damage her reputation.
Baldoni denied the allegations and countersued Lively, her husband Ryan Reynolds, and their publicist, accusing them of civil extortion and defamation.
The dispute escalated into multiple lawsuits, media leaks, and a highly publicised PR war that has dominated online discussions.
The trial is set for March 9, 2026, and both sides are publicly fighting for their reputations.
The Situation, Simply Explained
1. Blake Lively’s Allegations:
Claims Baldoni sexually harassed her on set.
Says Baldoni orchestrated a smear campaign against her after she raised concerns.
Alleges that his PR team planted damaging stories in the media.
2. Justin Baldoni’s Response:
Denies all allegations and says Lively’s claims are false and defamatory.
Argues Lively is manipulating the narrative to gain career control and sympathy.
Claims her PR team was actually the one spreading false stories about him.
3. Legal Action:
Lively sued Baldoni first for harassment and defamation.
Baldoni countersued for $400 million, adding Lively’s husband Ryan Reynolds and her PR team to the lawsuit.
The New York Times got involved, publishing a piece on Lively’s claims.
Baldoni then sued The New York Times for libel, claiming they manipulated evidence.
4. Ongoing PR War:
Both sides have leaked footage, text messages, and statements to the press.
TikTok and social media have turned the case into a viral sensation.
A trial date is set for 2026, but public opinion is shifting constantly.
Full Timeline of Events
Early Tensions & Film Production
January 26, 2023:
Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni are announced as co-leads for It Ends With Us.
Baldoni is also set to direct and produce the film.
May 2023 - Early 2024:
Filming begins but is delayed due to the writers’ strike.
August 6, 2024:
At the New York premiere, Lively and Baldoni walk the red carpet separately, fueling rumours of a feud.
Lively poses with the cast, while Baldoni attends with his wife and family.
Baldoni avoids press interactions with Lively.
August 9, 2024:
It Ends With Us premieres to massive box office success, earning $50 million opening weekend.
Despite the success, rumours of tension between Lively and Baldoni continue.
August 13, 2024:
Baldoni hires crisis PR representative Melissa Nathan, who previously worked with Johnny Depp.
Legal Battle Begins
December 20, 2024:
Blake Lively files a complaint against Baldoni, claiming:
He sexually harassed her on set.
He orchestrated a smear campaign to ruin her reputation.
His PR team planted false stories to discredit her.
December 21, 2024:
The New York Times publishes an article detailing Lively’s accusations.
Baldoni’s talent agency, WME, drops him as a client.
Reports emerge that Ryan Reynolds pressured WME to drop Baldoni at the Deadpool & Wolverine premiere.
Baldoni denies all allegations.
December 31, 2024:
Baldoni sues The New York Times for $250 million, claiming:
The outlet used “cherry-picked” and manipulated evidence.
Screenshots used in the article had altered timestamps.
The article was biased in favor of Lively.
Lively files an official lawsuit against Baldoni for harassment, retaliation, and defamation.
Counterattacks & PR War
January 16, 2025:
Baldoni files a $400 million lawsuit against: Lively, Ryan Reynolds, Publicist Leslie Sloane & Vision PR.
Claims Lively manipulated the film’s production to take control.
Alleges she planted false stories about HR complaints.
January 21, 2025:
Baldoni’s team releases behind-the-scenes footage, contradicting Lively’s claims.
In her lawsuit, Lively alleged that during a silent scene, Baldoni:
“Leaned forward and slowly dragged his lips from her ear down her neck,” whispering, “It smells so good.”
She claimed that after she objected, Baldoni responded, “I’m not even attracted to you.”
However, the footage released by Baldoni’s team paints a very different picture:
The video clearly shows a lighthearted exchange between Lively and Baldoni between takes.
Lively jokes about getting spray tan on Baldoni, to which he casually responds, “It smells good.”
The conversation continues naturally, with Baldoni later talking about his wife during the same scene.
The tone of the footage does not match the uncomfortable moment described in Lively’s allegations.
Additionally, during this interaction, Lively made a comment about Baldoni’s nose. As they danced closely, their noses touched, prompting Lively to laugh and say, “I feel so nosey. I mean, it’s like just noses.” Baldoni responded, “I know. And my nose is so big.” Lively then joked, “Yes, I was hoping that we could address this. It’s not too late. Just gotta shut down. Gotta call an insurance month, and just deal with that. Just kidding.” This exchange suggests a mutual, light-hearted banter rather than a hostile interaction.
The footage strongly suggests that Baldoni was acting in character, rather than engaging in inappropriate behaviour. Many have pointed out that his tone, body language, and casual references to his wife undermine Lively’s claims that this was a threatening or predatory moment.
January 27, 2025:
Trial date set for March 9, 2026.
Audio leaks of Baldoni apologizing to Lively over script disagreements.
February 1, 2025:
Baldoni launches a website, posting:
His legal timeline
Screenshots of conversations with Lively & Reynolds
Alleged proof of PR manipulation
February 3, 2025:
A judge warns both legal teams to stop litigating in the media.
February 4, 2025:
Baldoni reveals notes from an intimacy coordinator meeting that Lively allegedly skipped.
Provides text evidence that Lively declined to meet with the coordinator before filming.
If Justin is Innocent, Why Would Blake Do This?
If Baldoni is telling the truth, then why would Lively make these claims?
Possible Explanations:
Career Control – Lively may have wanted more power over the film and saw Baldoni as an obstacle.
Public Sympathy – Becoming a victim figure could boost her image.
Personal Grudge – Creative clashes may have turned personal.
PR Strategy – If she expected negative press, this could have preemptively shifted focus.
Social Media’s Favourite Theory: Ryan Reynolds’ Jealousy
Fans believe Reynolds was jealous of Lively’s dynamic with Baldoni.
The theory is based on:
Lively initially praising Baldoni, then freezing him out.
The lack of interactions during press events.
TikTok body language analysis.
There is ZERO real evidence, but TikTok has turned it into a full-blown narrative.
Taylor Swift, the ‘Dragons’ Texts & Power Plays
One of the more bizarre twists in the case is the revelation of text messages between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni, where Lively compared herself to Daenerys Targaryen from Game of Thrones and referred to Ryan Reynolds and Taylor Swift as her “dragons.”
In the texts, Lively jokingly but pointedly told Baldoni:
“If you ever get around to watching Game of Thrones, you’ll appreciate that I’m Khaleesi, and like her, I happen to have a few dragons.”
The implication? That Reynolds and Swift were her personal power players, capable of protecting her or going after those who crossed her.
Baldoni’s legal team is now using these messages as evidence to argue that Lively was leveraging her powerful connections against him.
This ties into Baldoni’s claim that Lively and her PR team planted negative press stories about him while positioning her as the victim. With Swift’s influence, Reynolds’ Hollywood power, and the reach of Lively’s PR machine, Baldoni’s team argues that Lively had the means to control the narrative before any legal filings even began.
Candace Owens & The Internet’s Short-Term Memory
Another unexpected public figure to get involved? Candace Owens.
Owens, usually known for her conservative political takes, has become one of the loudest voices defending Baldoni.
She has drawn comparisons to Johnny Depp vs. Amber Heard and has even gone as far as saying:
“Ryan Reynolds should be deported back to Canada for what he’s done to Justin.”\
The fascinating part?
Candace Owens is one of the most controversial figures online, yet suddenly everyone has ‘forgiven’ her past opinions because she’s aligned with a pop culture scandal.
The same people who previously ‘cancelled’ her are now agreeing with her takes, proving that in internet culture, all it takes is one shared opinion to bring people back onside.
The fact that a political firebrand is now a trusted voice in Hollywood gossip says a lot about how fickle online audiences can be.
It also raises the question: Does truth matter in these cases, or is it just who can sway public opinion the best?
Where PR Strategy Went Wrong
From a crisis PR standpoint, this case is a masterclass in strategic miscalculations—one that will likely be studied for years to come.
For Blake Lively: The golden rule in high-profile disputes is simple: Never let a crisis escalate into a spectacle.
Lively had the initial upper hand—a New York Times feature backing her claims, strong Hollywood connections, and the natural advantage of being the first to speak.
But once public sentiment started to shift, she should have moved to settle quietly. Instead, she doubled down as more contradictions surfaced, allowing the case to snowball into a reputational crisis—one that has now pulled Ryan Reynolds into the fallout.
What started as a legal dispute against Baldoni has now spiralled into an image crisis for Lively herself.
For Justin Baldoni: He has successfully flipped the narrative by exposing inconsistencies and pushing back with evidence—but the PR war isn’t over yet.
His continued engagement in the media battle carries risks—keeping the story alive when he should be working to close it.
Winning in the court of public opinion today doesn’t guarantee long-term reputation recovery. The challenge now is not just clearing his name, but moving forward without being defined by this scandal.
In an ideal world, Lively would have moved to settle the moment she lost the public’s trust. Instead, she now finds herself in the worst possible position—losing in both the legal arena and the court of public opinion.
Did The New York Times Help Shape the Narrative?
Something I can’t wrap my head around personally is how quickly The New York Times treated Lively’s accusations as if they were factual.
The New York Times denied any prior knowledge of Lively’s complaint or coordination with her team. Yet, metadata from their own article raises serious questions.
Images used in the article were uploaded on December 16 and 18—days before Lively’s complaint was officially filed on December 20.
A Twitter/X header linked to the article contained snippets of text from the complaint on December 18—before it was public.
Despite this, The New York Times publicly stated that no one from Lively’s team leaked the story to them.
This has led Baldoni’s legal team to argue that Lively worked with the NYT ahead of time to control the narrative before her complaint was even filed.
The Metadata Debate: Does It Actually Prove Anything?
Metadata is not always a smoking gun:
Metadata can be altered—it doesn’t always prove intent.
Some timestamps reflect routine content management, not premeditation.
A forensic investigation would be needed to verify if this was truly an inside tip-off or just standard editorial workflow.
The bigger issue is that Lively is now pushing for a gag order to silence Baldoni’s team from speaking publicly. But if this metadata suggests she was strategically feeding a narrative to the press before even filing her complaint, that argument loses credibility.
PR Takeaway
From a crisis PR standpoint, this metadata dispute highlights a crucial aspect of controlling narratives:
If Lively’s team did work with the NYT in advance, it was a calculated media play to dominate the first version of the story.
If The New York Times was already preparing the article before the complaint was filed, then their claims of neutrality are questionable.
If the metadata holds up under forensic analysis, it could significantly impact Baldoni’s lawsuit against the NYT.
At the end of the day, this isn’t just about a lawsuit—it’s about how reputations are won and lost in the court of public opinion.
Who’s Winning the Court of Public Opinion?
As of 6 February 2025, Justin Baldoni is winning the public narrative.
The leaked footage contradicted Lively’s core allegations.
The PR takedown accusations against Lively’s team have gained traction.
Social media has flipped, now scrutinising Lively and Reynolds instead of Baldoni.
But here’s the most fascinating takeaway:
This case is no longer just about Justin Baldoni or Blake Lively. It has become a bigger commentary on media manipulation, PR warfare, and the influence of Hollywood’s inner circle. And if there’s one undeniable truth about crisis PR, it’s this:
The facts matter less than who controls the story.
And right now, Baldoni controls the story.