Blake Lively is turning to art as a calming escape amid a swirl of high-profile personal and legal turmoil. The 38-year-old actress posted on her Instagram Story this week about watercolor painting, calling it a “cheaper and more peaceful than most coping mechanisms” as she navigates a fracturing friendship with Taylor Swift and a lawsuit involving It Ends With Us co-star and director Justin Baldoni. In the post, Lively highlighted watercolor books from Emily Lex Studio, noting that the guided books include a sketch template and a reference photo and cost about $24. She shared an image of one of her completed works—a pastel pink layer cake adorned with strawberries—and explained that the books allow her to unwind while still making each painting her own, adding that readers could take as much or as little time as they liked and tailor the paintings to their preferences.
The revelation comes at a turbulent moment for Lively, who has been embroiled in a highly publicized legal dispute with Baldoni and his Wayfarer Studios team. The case, Blake Lively v. Wayfarer Studios LLC, et al., centers on allegations of sexual harassment and retaliation, which Lively first brought in December 2024. Baldoni has denied the claims, and the dispute has intersected with the broader Hollywood drama surrounding Lively’s friendship with Swift. The public tension has been compounded by court proceedings and motions that have kept both legal teams and fans closely watching the timeline of depositions and discovery.
A series of recent court filings and rulings have shaped how and when those depositions will proceed. In one notable development, a judge denied a request by Baldoni’s team—the Wayfarer defendants—to extend the deposition deadline for Swift, who is not a party to the case but had previously been subpoenaed for testimony. The request sought to push Swift’s deposition to the end of October on grounds that the singer’s existing professional obligations would prevent scheduling within the current discovery window. Judge Lewis Liman said the defendants had not demonstrated good cause for the extension and pointed out that discovery had already been active for roughly six months. He noted that while scheduling could be difficult, that alone did not justify delaying the process without a compelling reason or renewed attempts to serve a subpoena.
Swift’s legal team has suggested in court filings that the pop star does not have a material role in the dispute, and Swift herself has signaled a reluctance to participate unless legally compelled. A letter from Swift’s counsel stated that the singer would only testify if forced to do so, underscoring her preference to remain outside the dispute unless the court required otherwise. The letter also indicated that Swift’s schedule would accommodate testimony during a week in October if the parties could resolve their disputes, but it did not indicate voluntary cooperation, a detail that has influenced the broader discovery posture in the case.
Separately, the judge granted Lively a request to extend the discovery period for depositions, directing all parties—Lively, Baldoni, and Wayfarer co-founders Steve Sarowitz and Jamey Heath—to be available for depositions within an extended window. In his order, Liman said Lively’s diligence and the lack of carelessness or strategic delay on her part weighed in favor of the extension, which aims to ensure a fair opportunity for all sides to gather evidence in a timely fashion. The ruling underscores the ongoing nature of discovery and the high-profile nature of the litigation, which has drawn media attention to depositions, subpoenas, and cross-claims involving Swift and others connected to the cast and crew of It Ends With Us.
The latest courtroom activity comes the same day that Swift’s counsel submitted a letter reiterating that Swift does not view herself as a participant in the core dispute, while still acknowledging potential readiness to testify if compelled by the court. The interplay between Lively’s personal statements about art, Swift’s non-party status, and Baldoni’s ongoing countersuits illustrates how closely tied the public narrative around the dispute has been to the names of star players who have moved in and out of focus as legal documents circulate.
For Lively, the personal coping mechanism offers a contrast to the public nature of the lawsuit and the social-media scrutiny that has shadowed her in recent months. The Instagram Story posting reflects a broader trend among celebrities who have turned to creative outlets as a way to manage stress and maintain a sense of privacy amid litigation and tabloid attention. The watercolor books cited by Lively are designed to offer guided practice, allowing artists to complete portraits or scenes with a degree of structure while still permitting personal expression. The post did not frame the activity as a direct response to a specific aspect of the lawsuit, but it arrived as new court documents highlighted the evolving procedural posture of the case.
The case, which pits Lively against Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios, has long been expected to go to trial in March 2026, with all depositions required to be completed by September 30 of that year. In the interim, the court has weighed issues related to subpoenas, deposition scheduling, and the role of non-parties in the discovery process. The ongoing discovery phase has included discussions about text messages and other communications between Lively and Swift that were produced under protective orders to prevent leaks, a dynamic that has fueled media interest while attempting to balance transparency with privacy concerns.
Observers note that the swirl of celebrity involvement—the publicized friendship with Swift, the high-stakes litigation with Baldoni, and the surrounding media attention—has intensified the scrutiny of every procedural step, from deposition dates to the timing of performances and publicity. While Lively’s focus on painting represents a personal reprieve, the broader legal process continues to unfold with parallel motions and responses that could influence the timeline and scope of discovery, the handling of third-party input, and the ultimate resolution of the case.
In briefing and courtroom filings, Lively’s team has pushed back against attempts to use the case as a nexus for broader media strategy, arguing that the Wayfarer defendants have repeatedly sought to bring Swift into the litigation to generate coverage. The defense has countered that Swift’s status as a non-party should limit her exposure to the core issues, though the possibility of compelled testimony remains if the court deems it necessary. The evolving narrative around the case—bridging celebrity culture, legal maneuvering, and media dynamics—continues to unfold as the parties move through discovery and move toward a trial date set for 2026.
As Lively pursues her artistic outlet, fans and observers will be watching how the court’s rulings on deposition timing and the handling of communications between the involved parties shape the trajectory of the case. With depositions extending into the fall and a trial date still more than a year away, the next several months are likely to bring further court orders, filings, and perhaps additional statements from the actors and their representatives about the intersections of art, fame, and legal accountability.