The ongoing legal battle between Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni continues to draw attention, with legal experts weighing in on the potential ramifications of their public feud. Johnny Depp's former attorney, Benjamin Chew, recently highlighted the risks involved for both parties, suggesting a potential "real danger" of a hung jury or a decision influenced by their high profiles.

Chew emphasized the strong legal representation on both sides, acknowledging their ability to present compelling arguments. However, he also pointed out the possibility of the jury struggling to reach a verdict or being swayed by external factors, such as the wealth and celebrity status of the individuals involved.

Baldoni's recent launch of a website featuring court documents and a timeline of events has been deemed a "bold approach" by some, while others view it as a potential misstep that could backfire in court. Legal experts are divided on whether this strategy is a smart move to control the narrative or a risky tactic that could prejudice the jury. Some argue that it allows the public to access information directly, while others express concern about the potential for influencing public opinion and undermining the legal process. David Fish, a litigation partner, cautioned that judges generally disapprove of pre-trial publicity that could taint the jury pool.

Celebrity attorney Chris Melcher offered a different perspective, asserting that Baldoni has a right to defend himself publicly given the public nature of the accusations. He argued that waiting for the trial in 2026 would be detrimental to Baldoni's reputation, emphasizing the importance of addressing the allegations in the court of public opinion. Fox News legal editor Kerri Urbahn echoed this sentiment, suggesting that the case will largely be decided by public perception.

Comparisons have been drawn to the Depp-Heard trial, with Chew noting similarities in the prominence of the actors involved but highlighting the different stakes in this case. He pointed out that Depp's lawsuit centered on defamation and reclaiming his reputation, whereas the Lively-Baldoni case presents the challenge of convincing a jury to care about a dispute between two wealthy and successful individuals. Urbahn suggested that the outcome of the case could signal a shift in the post-MeToo era, potentially indicating whether the Depp-Heard verdict was an anomaly or a sign of a more balanced approach to evaluating such cases.

The release of unedited footage from the "It Ends with Us" set has further complicated the situation, with both sides interpreting the footage differently and leading to a request for a gag order from Lively's legal team, which Baldoni's team has labeled an "intimidation tactic." A judge has since instructed both legal teams to adhere to New York's Rules of Professional Conduct, limiting their public statements about the case.

The legal complexities and public nature of the Lively-Baldoni feud continue to fuel speculation and discussion, with the ultimate outcome remaining uncertain.