Blake Lively’s Clandestine Strategy: Why She Secretly Filed a Subpoena Against Justin Baldoni Months Before Public Accusations

A new report has shed light on an unusual and secretive legal move by actress Blake Lively, who allegedly filed a subpoena against actor Justin Baldoni months before publicly accusing him of sexual harassment. According to Page Six, the situation has become a legal entanglement involving lawsuits from both parties, raising eyebrows as legal experts weigh in on the unusual tactics employed.

The report claims that, in an effort to gather evidence for a potential future lawsuit, Lively secretly filed a subpoena under the name of her company, rather than her own, to access private communications involving Baldoni and his former publicist. The subpoena was sent to Stephanie Jones, who had previously worked as Baldoni’s publicist and now runs her own firm, Jonesworks. The request sought all communications between Jones and crisis PR manager Melissa Nathan, as well as a former employee named Jennifer Abel, who was still working with Baldoni at the time.

The subpoena was allegedly part of a broader strategy to collect evidence related to Baldoni’s alleged involvement in a smear campaign against Lively while promoting the 2024 movie It Ends With Us. The communications obtained through the subpoena reportedly included messages that became key to Lively’s legal team’s argument. One such message from Nathan read, “We can bury anyone,” which Lively’s team claimed as evidence of a coordinated effort to damage her reputation.

Despite these claims, the initial lawsuit filed in connection with the subpoena was reportedly dropped in December 2024, just days before Lively formally filed a complaint with California’s Civil Rights Department, accusing Baldoni of sexual harassment.

Legal experts have weighed in on the developments, with attorney Ron Zambrano, who is not involved in the case, calling the strategy employed by Lively’s team “very shady” and “clandestine.” Zambrano suggested that this legal move was likely a tactic to quietly gather information without drawing attention or allowing Baldoni’s team a chance to respond, highlighting the unorthodox nature of the process.

In defense of his client, Baldoni’s lawyer, Bryan Freedman, criticized Lively’s actions. He argued that Lively and her husband, actor Ryan Reynolds, used their company, Vanzan, as a means of leveraging legal power inappropriately. Freedman contended that the subpoena tactic was a misuse of the legal system, intended to avoid scrutiny and prevent Baldoni’s team from challenging the request.

As this complex legal battle unfolds, the high-profile nature of the case, combined with the clandestine legal strategies at play, has captured the attention of both the public and legal professionals. With lawsuits now in motion between both parties, the outcome remains uncertain, leaving much to be debated about the lengths to which each side is willing to go in this highly charged situation.

As the case progresses, the entertainment industry and legal observers alike will be watching closely, with questions raised about the ethics of using legal tools in such a manner and the broader implications for public figures involved in harassment claims.