Taylor Swift was never deposed in the Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni lawsuit. Justin Baldoni’s attorneys tried twice in 2025 to compel her testimony, first through a May subpoena that was withdrawn and then through a September push that U.S. District Judge Lewis J. Liman rejected for lack of diligence. The underlying federal case settled in May 2026 without Swift ever sitting for questioning.
Why Baldoni’s Lawyers Wanted Swift
Swift’s link to the dispute was narrow. She licensed her song “My Tears Ricochet” for the It Ends With Us soundtrack, and she is a close friend of Lively. A spokesperson said Swift never set foot on the set, had no role in casting or creative decisions, did not score the film, and did not see it until weeks after release.1ABC7 New York. Judge Rules on Taylor Swift Deposition
Baldoni’s lead attorney, Bryan Freedman, argued that messages between Lively and Swift showed Lively was “strategically manipulating Baldoni’s public image by leveraging connections with her powerful and famous friends.”2Court TV. Taylor Swift’s Texts Exposed in Blake Lively’s Lawsuit One April 2024 exchange about the film’s trailer had Swift telling Lively that a “strategic” Baldoni would have left Swift’s song out because its inclusion gave Lively “more power over the film.” Lively called the inclusion Baldoni’s “only shot at having the appearance of an upper hand.”3CBC News. Blake Lively Taylor Swift Texts Released
Baldoni’s team also alleged that Lively’s attorney had “demanded that Ms. Swift release a statement of support for Ms. Lively” and threatened to release private texts if she refused.4ABC News. Blake Lively Accused of Pressuring Taylor Swift Lively’s lawyer, Mike Gottlieb, called that “categorically false.” Freedman, speaking on a podcast in May 2025, framed his approach bluntly: “Anyone that reasonably has information that can provide evidence in this case is gonna be deposed.”5ABC News. Taylor Swift Deposition in Lively-Baldoni Case
Swift’s name also surfaced in a crisis PR document authored by publicist Melissa Nathan and circulated on August 2, 2024. One passage proposed that the team could “explore planting stories about the weaponization of feminism and how people in BL’s circle like Taylor Swift, have been accused of utilizing these tactics to ‘bully’ into getting what they want.”6Deadline. Taylor Swift Blake Lively Deposition Lively’s team pointed to the document as evidence that invoking Swift’s celebrity was part of a premeditated strategy to deflect from the harassment allegations.
The May 2025 Subpoena
Freedman first subpoenaed Swift in May 2025, seeking messages between Swift and Lively’s legal team about alleged pressure on Swift to publicly back Lively. Swift’s lawyers at Venable LLP fought the subpoena in federal court in Washington, D.C., calling it an “unwarranted fishing expedition.”7BBC News. Taylor Swift Subpoena Withdrawn Lively’s team filed a motion to quash, and Judge Liman backed it. The subpoena was withdrawn by May 22, 2025, with Baldoni’s side saying the information had been obtained through other channels.8Deadline. Taylor Swift Subpoena Dropped by Justin Baldoni Judge Liman also struck a related letter from Freedman from the court docket, calling it “improper” and “irrelevant to any issue before this Court.”
The June 2025 Ruling on Swift-Lively Texts
The subpoena was gone, but the question of Swift-Lively communications was not. On June 18, 2025, Judge Liman ruled that Baldoni’s team could obtain messages between Lively and Swift about the film and the lawsuit through Lively’s own document production. The judge found the messages “reasonably tailored to discover information that would prove or disprove Lively’s harassment and retaliation claims,” noting Lively had herself identified Swift as someone with knowledge of “complaints or discussions about the working environment on the film.”9Variety. Justin Baldoni Can Obtain Taylor Swift and Blake Lively Messages A request can serve as both a “legitimate litigation tactic and an attempt to maneuver in the broader court of public opinion,” he wrote. A protective order kept the messages from being leaked.10NBC Boston. Judge Rules Baldoni Can Obtain Swift and Lively Messages
The September 2025 Deposition Fight
With the discovery deadline of September 30 bearing down, Baldoni’s lawyers made a renewed push. In a letter filed September 11, 2025, they told Judge Liman that Swift had “agreed to appear for deposition” during the week of October 20–25 but was unavailable sooner because of “preexisting professional obligations,” including the October 3 release of her twelfth studio album, The Life of a Showgirl.11Business Insider. Justin Baldoni Taylor Swift Blake Lively Deposition They asked the court to extend the deadline.
Swift’s attorney, J. Douglas Baldridge of Venable LLP, contradicted that account the next day. “Since the inception of this matter we have consistently maintained that my client has no material role in this action,” Baldridge wrote. “Further, my client did not agree to a deposition, but if she is forced into a deposition, we advised (after first hearing about the deposition just three days ago) that her schedule would accommodate the time required during the week of October 20 if the parties were able to work out their disputes.”12People. Taylor Swift Lawyer Says She Did Not Agree to Deposition Her team had offered a contingent scheduling window, not consent to testify.
Gottlieb, for Lively, argued Baldoni’s team was asserting Swift’s agreement “without evidence” as part of a strategy to “repeatedly” drag her into the litigation to “fuel their relentless media strategy” and generate “tabloid clickbait.”13Forbes. Blake Lively’s Lawyers Dispute Justin Baldoni’s Claim Taylor Swift Agreed to Deposition
Judge Liman’s Denial
Judge Liman denied the extension request on September 12, 2025. His reasoning was procedural, not about the merits of Swift’s knowledge. Discovery had been running for roughly six months. Baldoni’s team had not contacted Swift’s lawyers about scheduling until the week of September 8. They had not served a renewed subpoena. The only justification offered was Swift’s schedule. “Having failed to demonstrate appropriate diligence, the requested extension is denied,” Liman wrote.14CNN. Judge Denies Taylor Swift Deposition Request15ABC7 Chicago. Judge Denies Taylor Swift Deposition That ruling effectively ended the deposition effort.
The Process Server Arrest at Travis Kelce’s Home
Three days after the ruling, at roughly 2:00 a.m. on September 15, 2025, a private investigator named Justin Lee Fisher was arrested after jumping a fence at Travis Kelce’s gated estate in Leawood, Kansas, while trying to serve Swift with deposition papers for Baldoni’s team.16Rolling Stone. Man Arrested at Travis Kelce Home Attempting to Serve Taylor Swift Fisher, 48, a former police officer, was charged with misdemeanor criminal trespassing and released after posting bond.17Court TV. Man Arrested Outside Travis Kelce’s Home
On December 2, 2025, Fisher entered a one-year diversion agreement in Leawood Municipal Court. The trespassing charge will be dismissed if he completes the program, which includes a $1,000 diversion fee and no contact with the reporting parties or the residence. In his diversion application, Fisher explained the stakes: “I cannot have a conviction on my record or I will lose my private investigator license.”18The Kansas City Star. Man Who Trespassed at Kelce Home Enters Diversion Agreement
How the Underlying Case Ended
Swift was never deposed. No further attempts to compel her testimony appear in the record after the September 2025 ruling.
On April 2, 2026, Judge Liman dismissed ten of Lively’s thirteen claims, including her Title VII sexual harassment claims, finding she was an independent contractor rather than an employee.19PBS NewsHour. Judge Tosses Blake Lively Sexual Harassment Claims20NPR. Blake Lively Sexual Harassment Claims Tossed Out Three claims survived: two retaliation claims under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act and a breach of contract claim tied to a “Contract Rider Agreement” with anti-retaliation language Lively had negotiated after the 2023 actors’ strike.21United States District Court, Southern District of New York. Lively v. Wayfarer Studios LLC, 24-cv-10049, Opinion and Order
Trial was set for May 18, 2026. On May 4, 2026, the parties announced a settlement. Financial terms were not disclosed.22NPR. Blake Lively Justin Baldoni Settle23USA Today. Blake Lively Justin Baldoni Settlement Agreement Revealed With the case resolved, the question of Swift’s testimony is permanently closed.