Blake Lively wins defamation countersuit against Justin Baldoni after Judge Lewis J. Liman dismissed Baldoni’s $400 million legal action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, igniting heated discussions among fans over the judge’s Hollywood connections. This decision, delivered in a high-profile courtroom setting, has triggered a surge of emotional reactions online, given Liman’s ties to the entertainment industry.
Court Tosses Justin Baldoni’s Defamation Case Against Blake Lively
Judge Lewis J. Liman dismissed the entire countersuit Justin Baldoni filed against Blake Lively, ruling there was no evidence to support the claim of defamation. This legal battle, valued at $400 million, also included allegations of extortion, which were entirely thrown out by the court. While Baldoni is allowed to amend and refile some of his claims, such as alleged interference with contracts, the core defamation issue was shut down.
The court found that Baldoni’s countersuit was based mainly on assertions that Lively had threatened not to promote his film and had spread damaging narratives about him. After reviewing the details, Judge Liman was not convinced that the alleged threats crossed legal lines. Instead, he concluded the disputes were no more than typical negotiation tactics in professional settings.
According to a direct statement from the bench:
have not adequately alleged that Lively’s threats were wrongful extortion rather than legally permissible hard bargaining or renegotiation of working conditions
—via BBC. Furthermore, regarding defamation, the judge stated:
Wayfarer Parties have not alleged that Lively is responsible for any statements other than the statements in her lawsuit.
The implication is that Lively’s comments inside her lawsuit are legally protected and cannot be the basis for a defamation suit.
Baldoni’s efforts to loop in outside media, such as The New York Times, were also dismissed, adding another layer of frustration to his case. Still, the judge allowed him the option to try again, specifically on the matter of Lively’s alleged interference with his contracts on the It Ends With Us project.
Judge Liman’s Background and Connections Stir Online Outrage
The judge presiding over this case, Lewis J. Liman, currently serves in the Southern District of New York and was reappointed during Donald Trump’s administration. Liman comes from a family with deep legal and entertainment roots—his father Arthur Liman was a prominent partner at a respected New York firm, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison. Meanwhile, his brother Doug Liman is a famous Hollywood director known for films such as The Bourne Identity, Mr. & Mrs. Smith, and Edge of Tomorrow.
Curiously, Doug Liman and Blake Lively worked together in 2008 on a pro-Obama commercial for MoveOn.org’s Youth Vote program. This isolated past collaboration, which also featured Penn Badgley, has driven rumors and angry speculation across social media platforms. Fans, internet users, and observers dug up these industry connections immediately after news broke that Judge Liman sided with Lively.
On social platforms, some users accused the judge of being too close to Lively due to Doug Liman’s prior work, with suggestions that power couples like Lively and her husband Ryan Reynolds might have influenced the outcome. Others demanded that Judge Liman remove himself from the case due to the appearance of a conflict of interest.
One X user questioned the grounds for suspicion, posting:
What’s your point? Some guy she worked with years ago went to his judge brother and asked him to do something that could cost him his seat? Isn’t it much more likely that the suit had no merit?— Chicken Little (@HereForPatriots) June 9, 2025
Another commentator pushed back against the outrage, writing:
because his brother directed a show with thousands of actors 18 years ago, his years of being a lawyer and judge becomes invalid? yall are delusional and ridiculous— mo (@filled_popcorn) June 10, 2025
Although passionate, these online reactions haven’t translated into formal legal challenges, and experts say there is no valid legal reasoning for Liman’s disqualification. Attorney Bryan Freedman, whose name surfaced among those speculating online, is unlikely to pursue the matter in court given the lack of substantive evidence for judicial bias.
Fan Reaction Reflects Escalating Tensions and Distrust
A significant portion of the public has responded with emotional and intense skepticism to the ruling. The power dynamic between Blake Lively—a high-profile figure best known for Gossip Girl—and Justin Baldoni—famous from Jane the Virgin—has amplified attention on the case. These reactions underscore a growing sentiment of mistrust toward legal outcomes involving celebrities and perceived insider connections.
Fan comments online reflect not only distress about the judge’s ties but also frustration at a system some see as vulnerable to influence. For some, the idea that a brief commercial project nearly two decades ago could create unfair advantages is deeply unsettling. Others, however, argue that such connections are too tenuous and that the real issue is the legal merit—or lack thereof—of Baldoni’s claims.
What Happens Next in the Legal and Public Arenas?
With the core defamation charges dismissed, the legal risk for Blake Lively has substantially decreased, but the broader impact of this case continues to play out in the court of public opinion. Justin Baldoni still has an opportunity to refile his lawsuit in part, potentially taking a different legal approach focused on contract interference. This leaves the door open for the dispute to return to court.
Meanwhile, the heated reactions of fans, the involvement of key figures such as Doug Liman and Ryan Reynolds, and widespread debates over the fairness of the legal system will likely persist. The case has also heightened awareness of perceived Hollywood influence in judicial matters, making it a flashpoint for ongoing discussions about power, celebrity, and justice in high-profile legal battles.
