In a dramatic turn for one of Hollywood’s most closely watched legal battles, a federal judge has thrown out the majority of Blake Lively’s claims against her It Ends With Us director and co-star, Justin Baldoni, narrowing the scope of a case that has captivated both the entertainment industry and the public. The ruling, handed down by District Judge Lewis Liman in Manhattan on April 2, 2026, dismissed 10 out of the 13 claims in Lively’s lawsuit, including the high-profile allegations of sexual harassment and defamation. What remains are just three claims—retaliation, aiding and abetting retaliation, and breach of contract—none of which name Baldoni personally as a defendant. Only one claim continues against his production company, Wayfarer Studios.
The decision comes just weeks before jury selection was set to begin on May 18, 2026, marking what was expected to be a climactic moment in a legal saga that has generated headlines since late 2024. According to CNN, Lively’s lawsuit originally accused Baldoni of sexually harassing her during the production of the 2024 film adaptation of Colleen Hoover’s best-selling novel, as well as orchestrating a campaign to smear her reputation when she spoke out about the alleged mistreatment. Baldoni, who also acted opposite Lively in the film, has consistently denied all allegations.
Judge Liman’s ruling centered on a crucial legal technicality: the distinction between an employee and an independent contractor. As reported by FOX News and the Associated Press, Liman determined that Lively was an independent contractor on the film, not an employee. Because of this, she was not entitled to bring sexual harassment claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which specifically protects employees from workplace discrimination, including sexual harassment.
In his written opinion, Liman acknowledged the sensitive context of the film’s subject matter. “Assuming he was improvising, the conduct was not so far beyond what might reasonably be expected to take place between two characters during a slow dancing scene such that an inference of hostile treatment on the basis of sex would arise. At least in isolation, the conduct was directed to Lively’s character rather than to Lively herself,” the judge wrote, as cited by FOX News. Liman further noted, “Creative artists, no less than comedy room writers, must have some amount of space to experiment within the bounds of an agreed script without fear of being held liable for sexual harassment.”
For Lively, the ruling was a mixed result. While the court dismissed her sexual harassment and defamation claims, three claims survived—retaliation, aiding and abetting retaliation, and breach of contract. Lively’s attorneys were quick to emphasize that the dismissal of the sexual harassment claims was due to the legal definition of her work status, not an exoneration of the alleged behavior. “The claims of sexual harassment were dismissed not because the defendants did nothing wrong but because the court determined Blake Lively was an independent contractor, not an employee,” said Sigrid McCawley, Lively’s attorney, in a statement quoted by The Guardian.
McCawley underscored that the case would now focus on the “devastating retaliation and the extraordinary steps the defendants took to destroy Blake Lively’s reputation because she stood up for safety on the set.” She added, “For Blake Lively, the greatest measure of justice is that the people and the playbook behind these coordinated digital attacks have been exposed and are already being held accountable by other women they’ve targeted.” Lively, according to her attorney, “looks forward to testifying at trial and continuing to shine a light on this vicious form of online retaliation so that it becomes easier to detect and fight.”
Wayfarer Studios, for its part, expressed relief at the court’s decision. “These were very serious allegations, and we are grateful to the Court for its careful review of the facts, law and voluminous evidence that was provided,” representatives for Wayfarer said in a statement to CNN. “What’s left is a significantly narrowed case, and we look forward to presenting our defense to the remaining claims in court.”
The roots of the dispute trace back to the production of It Ends With Us, a 2024 film that tackled themes of domestic violence and starred Lively and Baldoni as the central couple. Lively’s initial complaint, first reported by The New York Times in December 2024, alleged that Baldoni made inappropriate sexual comments, discussed his past pornography addiction, and improvised intimate scenes that had not been choreographed or consented to. Lively claimed that after she raised concerns, Baldoni and his team “weaponize[d] a digital army” to discredit her, flooding social media with content designed to undermine her credibility and bolster Baldoni’s reputation.
Baldoni’s legal team countered that any awkward or miscommunicated behavior was in the context of a film dealing with adult themes and that the production team accommodated Lively’s concerns by making changes she requested. In court filings, his attorneys argued, “It was not illegal for Baldoni to promote positive content about himself or truthful narratives about various events. That Lively’s reputation may have suffered is a result of her own ill-advised public statements and actions. This is a dispute about Hollywood reputations, not genuine legal wrongs.”
The legal wrangling escalated further in January 2025, when Baldoni filed a $400 million defamation lawsuit against Lively and her husband, actor Ryan Reynolds, alleging that they “hijacked” his film and attempted to destroy his career. That suit, however, was dismissed by a federal judge in June 2025, who ruled that Lively’s sexual harassment claims were protected by law and could not serve as the basis for defamation.
As the dispute played out in court, it spilled over into the public domain. Evidence unsealed in January included dozens of text messages between Lively and her close friend Taylor Swift, as well as exchanges with other celebrities like Ben Affleck. In one message, Lively reportedly referred to Baldoni as the “doofus director of my movie” and sought Swift’s advice on a screenplay rewrite, to which Swift replied, “I’ll do anything for you!” These glimpses into the private lives of A-list stars only intensified the media circus surrounding the case.
The film itself, released in 2024, was a commercial success, raking in more than $350 million worldwide. Yet, as The Guardian noted, the movie’s achievements were quickly overshadowed by the legal and personal drama between its stars. “The longer this goes on and the more mud that’s slung at each other, it really hurts both of them,” observed Matthew Belloni, a former entertainment lawyer and reporter.
With mediation efforts having failed last month, the stage is set for a trial in May 2026 that will focus squarely on the remaining claims of retaliation and breach of contract. While the legal arguments will unfold in court, the broader conversation about workplace boundaries, power dynamics in Hollywood, and the impact of digital campaigns on reputations is likely to continue far beyond the verdict.
As both sides prepare for the next chapter, the entertainment world—and the public—will be watching closely to see what new revelations emerge and whether the narrowed focus of the case brings any resolution to a saga that has already left its mark on the industry.