In a significant legal development, the attorneys representing Justin Baldoni are urging the court to reject Blake Lively's potential request for a gag order. The core of their argument hinges on the assertion that Lively initiated the public discourse surrounding this dispute. After Bryan Freedman, Baldoni's attorney, disclosed a 10-minute video from the set of "It Ends With Us" and announced plans to reveal more information via a website, Lively's legal team sought a conference with Judge Lewis J. Liman to discuss appropriate conduct in the litigation process.

Lively's legal representatives emphasized that federal litigation should adhere strictly to court rules and professional standards, warning that Freedman's media interactions could prejudice the jury pool. In response, Kevin Fritz, another of Baldoni's attorneys, argued in a letter dated January 23rd that granting a gag order would amount to an intimidation tactic. Fritz contended that Lively's efforts to force private defense against public allegations were improper and amounted to tactical gamesmanship. He also highlighted the severe repercussions faced by Baldoni and his associates, including financial losses and public backlash, following the disclosure of Lively's complaint.

The controversy extends beyond courtroom tactics, raising important questions about transparency and justice. Both parties have made serious accusations, each asserting their right to present their side of the story. Baldoni's team maintains they have nothing to hide and insist on defending themselves through truthful disclosures. Meanwhile, Lively's camp remains focused on ensuring the legal process unfolds in court rather than through media narratives. As the pre-trial conference approaches, the case underscores the importance of upholding ethical standards in legal proceedings while protecting the rights of all involved.