Ryan Reynolds Fires Back at Justin Baldoni’s $400M Lawsuit: “Hurt Feelings” Don’t Count in Court

In a legal battle that has captured the attention of Hollywood, Ryan Reynolds is seeking to have a lawsuit filed by actor Justin Baldoni dismissed, arguing that Baldoni cannot sue him over “hurt feelings.”

Reynolds, who is married to actress Blake Lively, was named in the lawsuit filed by Baldoni, accusing the Deadpool star of mocking and bullying him by using a character called “Nicepool” in Deadpool & Wolverine. The character, which Reynolds created as a satirical take, is said to be based on Baldoni, mocking his “woke feminist” image. However, in a motion filed on Tuesday, Reynolds’ legal team did not dispute the connection between Nicepool and Baldoni but argued that Baldoni’s reaction to the character represents “thin-skinned outrage.”

The legal dispute between Reynolds and Baldoni has escalated following the release of the film It Ends With Us, in which Baldoni directed and Lively starred. After the film’s successful debut in the summer of 2024, Lively publicly accused Baldoni of sexually harassing her on set and claimed that Baldoni used his publicists to spread negative stories about her. Baldoni responded with a countersuit, alleging that Lively and Reynolds were attempting to ruin his career with false accusations.

Baldoni’s lawsuit also claimed that Reynolds berated him for “fat shaming” Lively and called him a “sexual predator.” Baldoni further accused Reynolds of pressuring his agency, WME, to drop him as a client.

In their motion to dismiss, Reynolds’ lawyers argue that calling someone a “sexual predator” is not defamation if Reynolds genuinely believes it. “The allegations suggest that Mr. Reynolds genuinely, perhaps passionately, believes that Mr. Baldoni’s behavior is reflective of a ‘predator,’” the motion states. “While Mr. Baldoni may not appreciate being called a predator, those hurt feelings do not give rise to legal claims.”

The motion also underscores that Reynolds was not making a statement of fact but was offering an “unabashed negative opinion” of Baldoni’s character. The legal team further asserted that Reynolds’ First Amendment rights allow him to hold negative views, especially when it comes to defending his wife from what he believes to be sexual harassment.

The legal documents go on to argue that the lawsuit is insufficient and essentially serves as a “burn book” filled with grievances. The motion asserts that Reynolds’ actions were a reflection of standing with his wife and supporting her in a time of distress, and that Baldoni should not be able to use the legal system to retaliate for perceived slights.

Reynolds’ legal team also referenced Baldoni’s past confessions during podcast appearances, in which he admitted to “crossing boundaries” in his younger years due to addiction to pornography. They argue that it would be unjust to allow Baldoni to profit from these public confessions, which he used to build a brand around his personal growth, only to turn around and sue Reynolds for pointing out what Baldoni has openly discussed.

Additionally, Baldoni has filed a lawsuit against The New York Times, which published an article in December based on Lively’s accusations, as well as against Leslie Sloane, the publicist for Lively and Reynolds.

The outcome of this legal confrontation could have broader implications, not only for the individuals involved but also for the intersection of public personas, private opinions, and the boundaries of defamation law. As the case continues to unfold, both Reynolds and Baldoni will likely have to contend with the public attention surrounding their legal battles, and how their reputations will be shaped by the courts and media alike.