The legal fight between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni just changed in a big way, and the timing could not be tighter. Only weeks before the trial is set to begin, a federal judge has cut down most of Lively’s claims, reshaping what this case will actually be about in court.

This lawsuit has been tied to the film "It Ends With Us", where both actors worked together, with Baldoni also directing. The case has drawn attention because it mixes workplace claims, reputation damage, and the power dynamics that often stay hidden behind the scenes in Hollywood.

Now, the story heading into trial looks very different from what it did even a month ago.

A Major Legal Reset Before Trial

Lively / IG / On April 2, 2026, Judge Lewis J. Liman issued a detailed ruling that dismissed 10 out of the 13 claims Blake Lively originally filed.

Among the claims that were dismissed were sexual harassment, defamation, and conspiracy. These were some of the most serious accusations in the case, and their removal shifts both the tone and the legal stakes. It also led to Justin Baldoni being removed as an individual defendant, which changes how the courtroom battle will play out.

The judge’s decision did not say those claims were false. Instead, it focused on legal structure and jurisdiction. That distinction matters more than it might sound at first.

The ruling pointed out that the alleged incidents happened during filming in New Jersey. Lively’s legal team had tried to apply California law, but the court found that connection too weak. That alone knocked out a big portion of the case.

Another key issue was Lively’s status in the film. The court ruled that she was working as an independent contractor, not an employee. That detail blocked certain federal claims, including those under Title VII, which typically cover workplace harassment for employees.

What Still Remains in the Case?

Even after the cuts, the lawsuit is not over. Three claims are still alive, and they will be decided by a jury. These include breach of contract, retaliation, and aiding and abetting retaliation.

That might sound like a smaller case, but it is still serious. Retaliation claims often focus on how someone was treated after raising concerns, which can carry real weight in court. These are not side issues. They go to the heart of how people are treated when they speak up.

The case will now move forward against the remaining defendants, including Wayfarer Studios, the production company co-founded by Baldoni. This keeps the spotlight on the production side of "It Ends With Us", rather than on Baldoni as an individual.

The trial is scheduled to begin on May 18, 2026, in a New York federal court. That gives both sides only a short window to adjust their strategies after this major ruling.

Both Hollywood bigwigs are expected to testify. Baldoni’s legal team has already confirmed that he will appear in person, along with producer Jamey Heath and crisis publicist Melissa Nathan. Their testimony is expected to push back strongly against the idea of a coordinated smear campaign.

A settlement attempt earlier this year did not work out, which means this case is now headed straight into a courtroom showdown.

Two Very Different Reactions

Baldoni / IG / After the ruling, both sides quickly shared their reactions. Baldoi’s legal team treated the ruling as a clear win

Lively’s legal team made it clear that they still see the core of the case as intact. Her lawyer said the focus has always been on retaliation and the alleged effort to damage Lively’s reputation after she raised concerns about safety on set.

The “Gossip Girl” star’s team also downplayed the dismissed claims, calling the outcome a technical issue rather than a statement about the truth of her allegations. That message is aimed at keeping public attention on the remaining claims.

On the other side, Baldoni’s legal team treated the ruling as a clear win. They emphasized that all sexual harassment claims and all claims against individual defendants were dismissed. Their statement highlighted the seriousness of the original accusations and expressed relief at the court’s decision.