Taylor Swift pulled deeper into Blake Lively–Justin Baldoni court clash as deposition fight escalates

Taylor Swift’s name has again surfaced in the ongoing legal battle between actor Blake Lively and director-actor Justin Baldoni. Court filings reviewed this week show Baldoni’s team has sought Swift’s deposition, claiming she has agreed, but only after October 20.

An attorney for Swift, however, clarified in a letter that the pop star has not agreed voluntarily and would only testify if the court requires it. Her legal team stressed that her twelfth album, The Life of a Showgirl, releases on October 3, and she cannot appear for questioning before then.

The case, centred on allegations of workplace harassment and retaliation linked to the film It Ends With Us, has drawn Swift into its orbit because of her indirect connection to the project. One of her tracks, My Tears Ricochet, was licensed for the film, but she has repeatedly denied having any creative involvement. Despite this, Lively herself identified Swift as someone who may have knowledge of conversations about working conditions on set, prompting Baldoni’s lawyers to pursue her deposition.

Lively’s camp has pushed back strongly. In a filing dated September 12, her attorneys argued that Baldoni’s side is using Swift’s name as part of a “media strategy” rather than a genuine discovery process. They described the move as an attempt to delay proceedings and generate headlines, noting that the trial is set for March 2026 and discovery deadlines are already under pressure.

This is not the first time Swift has been pulled into the case. Earlier in May, Baldoni’s team issued subpoenas to Swift and her law firm, Venable LLP, only to withdraw them two weeks later after objections. At the time, a spokesperson for Swift criticised the effort as “tabloid clickbait,” underscoring that her role was limited to licensing a song among many used in the film.

Judge Lewis J Liman has already allowed Baldoni’s lawyers access to certain text messages between Lively and Swift, suggesting potential relevance to the claims. What remains uncertain is whether the judge will extend the discovery deadline to accommodate Swift’s testimony.

For now, Swift’s deposition remains conditional, and the court must decide if her schedule and connection warrant further involvement in a case that continues to draw widespread attention.