Blake Lively Aims to Dismiss Justin Baldoni's $400 Million Lawsuit

Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni

In a significant development in the ongoing legal battle between "It Ends With Us" co-stars, Blake Lively has filed a motion to dismiss Justin Baldoni's $400 million defamation lawsuit.

Lively's legal team argues that her actions are protected under a recently enacted California law designed to shield individuals who report sexual harassment from retaliatory legal action.

The motion, submitted on Thursday, March 20, 2025, cites Assembly Bill 933, a 2023 amendment to California law that grants legal protection to those who make statements about harassment, assault, or discrimination.

Lively's attorneys contend that Baldoni's lawsuit is a "vengeful" attempt to weaponize the legal system against her for speaking out about alleged sexual misconduct.

Lively's legal team characterizes Baldoni's lawsuit as a "malicious scheme" aimed at silencing her and causing reputational damage.

They argue that the law explicitly prohibits the use of defamation lawsuits as a means of retaliation against individuals who have filed legal claims or publicly addressed issues of sexual harassment.

This motion follows a similar filing by Lively's husband, Ryan Reynolds, who is also named as a co-defendant in Baldoni's suit.

Reynolds' attorneys argued that his involvement in the case is limited to being a "supportive spouse" and that his statements about Baldoni constitute protected opinion.

The legal dispute stems from Lively's December 2024 complaint filed with the California Civil Rights Department, in which she accused Baldoni of sexual harassment and retaliation during the production of "It Ends With Us."

Baldoni has vehemently denied these allegations and countered with his own lawsuit, claiming that Lively and Reynolds orchestrated a campaign to defame him and derail his career.

As the case unfolds, it highlights the complex intersection of entertainment industry dynamics, #MeToo-era legislation, and the challenges of navigating public accusations in the digital age.

The court's decision on Lively's motion to dismiss could have significant implications for how similar cases are handled in the future, particularly in California's entertainment industry.