Why a Judge Ordered the Full Birth-Video Footage in Blake Lively’s Lawsuit

19 November 2025

Jamey Heath and Justin Baldoni; Blake Lively. Cindy Ord/Getty ; Gotham/WireImage

In the unfolding legal drama between Blake Lively and the team behind the film It Ends With Us, a U.S. federal judge has issued a significant ruling: producer Jamey Heath must hand over the complete footage of his wife giving birth under a prior discovery order.

At the heart of Lively’s lawsuit are claims of sexual harassment and a hostile work environment on the film’s set, directed by and starring Justin Baldoni. Among her allegations: that Heath showed her and her assistant a “fully nude” video of his wife during childbirth without warning or consent and that the segment shown to her when he asked confusion of pornography.

During the recent motion proceedings, Judge Lewis J. Liman concluded that the discovery order “encompassed more than the video Heath claims he showed Lively” and clarified that the scope included any footage depicting the delivery as part of relevant evidence. The ruling stipulates that the video will remain sealed under protective order given its extremely sensitive nature, yet must be produced in full.

Heath’s defence asserted that he had produced a three-minute segment and believed the earlier order only required “the opening frame” of a home-birth video, which he described as a respectful, consented family recording, not pornography. Lively’s legal team strongly contested that this short excerpt did not match what she and her assistant had been shown on set, and they accused Heath of withholding further footage.

Despite Lively’s request for sanctions against Heath for non-compliance, the judge declined to penalise him, noting that while Heath misread the order, his actions were not deliberate defiance. Heath has until a set deadline to submit all footage or face potential consequences, and Lively is preparing to advance her claims, which seek more than $160 million in damages.

The broader context is a high-stakes controversy involving one of Hollywood’s biggest players. Lively’s lawsuit, filed in December 2024, accuses Baldoni and his production company of failing to provide workplace protections, allowing improvised intimate scenes, and creating a culture where boundaries were ignored. The film itself, while a box-office success, has become a battleground for allegations of mistreatment and power imbalance.

Wall Street Journal

The judge’s decision underscores the importance of thorough disclosure in discovery when sensitive personal material is alleged to have been shown without permission in a workplace setting. For Lively, the footage is pivotal whether it matches her description of the event could sway the credibility and strength of her claims. For Heath and the defence, failing to produce compliant material could damage their legal position and expose them to accusations of obstruction.

This case also raises larger questions around consent, privacy and what qualifies as evidence in workplace disputes, especially in industries where personal and professional boundaries often blur. The judge’s willingness to insist on full production even for highly personal, family-recorded footage is a signal that courts will push through the protective language when the material is central to the claim.

As the trial date looms in March 2026, both sides are now locked in legal manoeuvring. Baldoni’s countersuit for $400 million was dismissed earlier this year, and his motion to throw out Lively’s suit is still pending. Meanwhile, the fight over what was shown, what should have been disclosed, and what constitutes appropriate on-set conduct remains unresolved.

For audiences and industry watchers, the ruling offers a glimpse into how far legal scrutiny can reach when personal media intersects with professional settings. Whether this birth-video issue becomes a pivotal moment at trial or remains a contentious pre-trial skirmish depends on how well each side navigates the evidence and the narratives around it.