A federal judge has officially struck a controversial letter submitted by Justin Baldoni’s legal team, which alleged that Blake Lively tried to pressure Taylor Swift into making a public statement of support amid her legal dispute.
Judge: Letter Was “Inflammatory” and “Irrelevant”
Judge Lewis Liman dismissed the letter from the court record on Thursday, ruling it served no legal purpose. According to the judge, the letter didn’t request any specific action from the court and had no bearing on the central issues of the case.
The judge stated the filing merely attempted to “promote public scandal” and made “inflammatory accusations” without concrete evidence, suggesting it was designed more for media attention than legal relevance.
Accusations Against Blake Lively and Taylor Swift Dropped from Record
The letter, submitted by Baldoni’s attorney Bryan Freedman, accused Lively of threatening to leak years of private text messages unless Swift publicly supported her during the legal fight involving Baldoni and a film project.
Although Taylor Swift was recently subpoenaed and has been mentioned multiple times in the case, the court made it clear this letter crossed a line.
Lively’s Camp Applauds Swift Court Action
A spokesperson for Blake Lively reacted swiftly, praising the court’s decision:
“It took the court less than 24 hours to see through Mr. Freedman’s irrelevant, improper and inflammatory accusations, strike them, remove them from the court, and warn Mr. Freedman that further misconduct may be met with sanctions.”
Baldoni’s Team Not Backing Down
Despite the judge’s decision, a source close to Justin Baldoni’s team claims the dismissal is purely procedural and doesn’t prevent them from seeking further discovery related to the alleged pressure tactics involving Swift and Lively.
Background: The Taylor Swift, Blake Lively, and Justin Baldoni Triangle
Swift’s name has come up several times in the legal case — especially concerning a private meeting between Swift, Lively, and Baldoni during the production of the film at the center of the dispute. However, it remains unclear what role, if any, Swift plays in the case beyond those associations.
