Taylor Swift might not be able to shake this one off.
In the latest twist in the ongoing legal saga between It Ends With Us co-stars Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni, Swift has been subpoenaed by Baldoni’s attorneys as a witness. The pop star’s team was quick to push back on the legal action, but a judge will ultimately decide whether she has to comply.
On Tuesday’s show, Megyn was joined by attorney Mark Geragos to discuss the subpoena and where the legal drama is likely headed next.
The Subpoena
Citing “sources with direct knowledge,” TMZ reported last Friday that Baldoni’s lawyer Bryan Freedman “has now subpoenaed Taylor as a witness in the Lively-Baldoni legal war.”
A representative for Swift released a statement soon after calling the subpoena attention grabbing. “Taylor Swift never set foot on the set of this movie, she was not involved in any casting or creative decisions, she did not score the film, she never saw an edit or made any notes on the film, she did not even see It Ends With Us until weeks after its public release, and was traveling around the globe during 2023 and 2024 headlining the biggest tour in history,” it read.
“The connection Taylor had to this film was permitting the use of one song, ‘My Tears Ricochet,'” it continued. “Given that her involvement was licensing a song for the film, which 19 other artists also did, this document subpoena is designed to use Taylor Swift’s name to draw public interest by creating tabloid clickbait instead of focusing on the facts of the case.”
Lively’s spokesperson had a similar message. “Mr. Baldoni… and team continue to turn a case of sexual harassment and retaliation into entertainment for the tabloids,” the statement read, in part. “This is a very serious legal matter, not Barnum & Bailey’s Circus. The defendants continue to publicly intimidate, bully, shame and attack women’s rights and reputations.”
The Alleged Meeting
But the statements fail to mention Swift’s reported presence at a key meeting about the film between Baldoni, Lively, and Lively’s husband, Ryan Reynolds, at the couple’s Manhattan apartment.
After Lively filed a lawsuit in the Southern District of New York on New Year’s Eve against Baldoni, his publicist, and his production company (Wayfarer Studios) for “retaliating against her for reporting sexual harassment and workplace safety concerns,” Baldoni responded with a $250 million libel lawsuit against The New York Times for its reporting on Lively’s allegations and a bombshell $400 million lawsuit against his co-star, her husband, and their publicist.
The latter lawsuit states Baldoni was invited to Lively’s New York City penthouse, where Reynolds and “a famous, and famously close, friend” of the couple – believed to be Swift – were present. The suit alleges Reynolds and the unnamed guest gushed about Lively’s rewrites to the movie’s pivotal rooftop scene, and text messages from after the meeting offered additional color.
“I really love what you did. It really does help a lot. Makes it so much more fun and interesting. (And I would have felt that way without Ryan or Taylor),” Baldoni wrote to Lively. “You really are a talent across the board. Really excited [a]nd grateful to do this together.”
Lively responded with a lengthy note that read, in part: “Both Ryan and [redacted] have established themselves as absolute titans as writers and storytellers outside of their primary gig – just singing or just acting or [redacted] just directing. I’m so lucky to have them as creative barometers. But also to have them as people who prop me up and make sure I’m seen for all I can, and do offer. Because they know firsthand all I contribute. They also know I’m not always as good at making sure I’m seen and utilized for fear of threatening egos, or fear of affecting the ease of the process. They don’t give a shit about that. And because of that, everyone listens to them with immense respect and enthusiasm. So I guess I have to stop worrying about people liking me.”
The suit said that Baldoni believed “the message could not have been clearer” that he was “not just dealing with Lively,” but was “also facing Lively’s ‘dragons,’ two of the most influential and wealthy celebrities in the world, who were not afraid to make things very difficult for him.”
What Comes Next
While Megyn admitted she was “biased” toward Freedman because he is also her attorney, she said she understands why Swift is relevant to the case. “I actually don’t find this surprising, and I think most lawyers would subpoena a witness to this critical meeting,” she said. “And the fact that she is Taylor Swift doesn’t allow her to be treated any differently from somebody who is named… Taylor Smith.”
Geragos, who noted he considers Freedman “one of my closest friends in the world,” took issue with how Swift’s rep framed her involvement as just licensing a song if she was at the meeting. “I understand that it’s a pain in the ass. I understand that you don’t want to be involved,” he said. “But the fact is, [if] you’re a percipient witness that is what litigation is all about.”
While both sides have said they are not interested in mediation, Geragos was not sure how this case doesn’t end up settled first. “I don’t think this will ever get to trial… [because Lively and Reynolds] can’t afford to have this go to trial,” he explained. “They cannot weather the collateral damage that will be done at a trial.”
“I suppose you can manage out of anything from a crisis management standpoint,” he concluded, “but the amount of self-inflicted damage in this case… and kind of their tone deaf responses to things has just been astonishing to me.”
You can check out Megyn’s full Kelly’s Court by tuning in to episode 1,071 on YouTube, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you like to listen. And don’t forget that you can catch The Megyn Kelly Show live on SiriusXM’s Triumph (channel 111) weekdays from 12pm to 2pm ET.