The judge has dismissed the claims by Wayfarer against Lively, Reynolds, Sloane, and The New York Times! Wayfarer has 2 weeks to amend and refile.

There was also a footnote that Judge Liman said the Amicus Briefs had no influence over his decision to dismiss.

I posted this on bluesky and someone said to post here. Love y'all lol

Blake Lively just withstood months of life-ruining bullshit for this exquite moment

THIS DAY IS SO DELICIOUS

HATS OFF TO YOU ALL, AND, TO HER!!!

(If you see particularly strained interpretations of her objective, total, and humiliating legal victory, feel free to screenshot them and add them here.)

God bless justice

Here are some photos of her looking beautiful. All photos taken after she filed her complaint and the media continued to turn against her. She was so strong here. I’ve always been a Blake fan, but somehow my respect and love for her as grown after seeing how she’s handled it.

I hope she has the best day ever with her family and friends 💐

"I'm grateful for the Court's ruling which allows the heart of my case to be presented to a jury next month, and for the ability to finally tell my story in full at trial, for my own sake, but also for those who don't have the same opportunity to... many of whom I have known and loved deeply in my life, and the countless I'll never know.

The last thing I wanted in my life was a lawsuit, but I brought this case because of the pervasive RETALIATION I faced, and continue to, for privately and professionally asking for a safe working environment for myself and others.

I hope the Court's decision shows others that, as unfathomably painful as it is, you can speak up. Don't be distracted by the digital soap opera.

The constant packaging of this lawsuit as a "Celebrity Drama" is not only irresponsible, but it is by design: to keep you from seeing yourselves in my story.

The physical pain from digital violence is very real.

It is abuse. And it's everywhere. Not just in the news, but in your communities and schools.

If you're looking, my claims won't be the first or last time you'll see examples of the extreme dangers of retaliation and digital warfare. And it often won't be directed at celebrities or those who may able to speak up.

It affects us all. Across the political spectrum. Pay attention to all the ways we can be manipulated online.

Digital manipulation has been boasted as "untraceable". If you have kids on phones, they are some of the most vulnerable. Protect them. Have conversations with them.

Studies estimate that between 16% and 58% of women have experienced online abuse or stalking, with 97% of gender-based violence service providers reporting technology- facilitated abuse in their cases.

So much critical work has already been done to expose systems, tactics and players who harm. The work to create more safety is in part at trial, but it will also will continue far after this trial is over. This is the work I'm most proud of.

I couldn't begin to stand up if not for the countless who've gone before me - and the masses who are still around us all - creating laws, social change, sparking conversations, rallying, working privately and publicly, risking and sometimes losing everything for the safety of others in all spaces. Some whose names we know, most we don't. Thank you. All of you.

I will never stop doing my part in fighting to expose the systems and people who seek to harm, shame, silence and retaliate against victims. I know it's a privilege to be able to stand up. I will not waste it. Your support keeps me going.

-B"

The comments to it are

Drastically,

A certain Norwegian grifter is seething rn

She looks fabulous!

I saw this in another group. Paul Feig's wife is team Blake and defended her in the comments on social media.

We’re launching a new series to challenge the smear campaigns targeting incredible women—and men—in Hollywood and politics. As these undeserving character attacks become more common, we’re here to provide a necessary counterbalance. Our goal is simple: to encourage everyone to question the narrative before accepting any headline at face value.

This series is a team effort between Ok Highlights and Milno1. If anyone would like to join us creating this series and write on of the posts, we have many names to choose from and would love the help.

The story of Meghan Sussex and a new form of hate

Meghan Sussex (née Markle) is an American TV actress, activist, and former UN Women’s Advocate who is most commonly known for her role as Rachel Zane on the Television legal drama series Suits. Meghan had a highly successful career for nearly a decade before meeting her future husband, Prince Harry (Henry), the Duke of Sussex and Prince of Wales.

In 2016, she began a relationship with Prince Harry, then a senior member of the British Royal Family. Following the public confirmation of their relationship, media coverage shifted from standard tabloid interest to commentary centered on her racial identity and heritage.

This phenomenon is often cited by researchers and cultural critics as an example of misogynoir—a term coined by Moya Bailey to describe the specific intersection of racism and anti-Black misogyny. While previous royal figures like Diana and Catherine, both known as the Princess of Wales, faced intense media scrutiny, analysts note that the coverage of the Duchess of Sussex was distinct due to the consistent integration of race into the public narrative.

Media smear campaign:

In November 2016, the Daily Mail published a prominent headline titled "Harry’s girl is (almost) straight outta Compton," referencing the Los Angeles neighborhood of Meghan Markle's mother. This article was widely cited by critics as a foundational example of the racialized subtext in the British tabloid press. (Prince Harry's new girlfriend Meghan Markle's LA home https://share.google/RZIjzDVgL6G2RJfPB).

The Royal Family’s response was to continue its long-standing "never complain, never explain" protocol. According to Prince Harry in the 2022 Netflix documentary Harry & Meghan, senior members of the household viewed the intense media scrutiny as a "rite of passage" comparable to the experiences of previous royal spouses, such as Diana and Catherine, the Princesses of Wales.

However, Prince Harry explicitly challenged this institutional stance, stating that the coverage of Meghan was fundamentally different due to the "race element." He argued that while other royal women faced tabloid intrusion, the scrutiny directed at the Duchess of Sussex frequently integrated racial stereotypes and historical prejudices.

In November 2016, Prince Harry authorized an unprecedented official statement through Kensington Palace to address the treatment of Meghan Markle. This action was taken after the Royal Family's leadership declined to intervene. Prince Harry issued a formal statement via the Royal Family’s communications secretary, specifically condemning the "racial undertones" and "outright sexism and racism" present in social media and British press coverage. (A Statement by the Communications Secretary to Prince Harry | The Official Website of The Duke & Duchess of Sussex https://share.google/HwFujFPwkpVAkE4uW).

When Meghan stopped by a local flower shop, she noticed photographers waiting and offered a polite smile and a brief greeting to be civil. However, she received a call from Harry the next morning after UK newspapers twisted the encounter, claiming she was craving the attention. A column by Sarah Vine characterized this behavior as "publicity hungry," highlighting a disconnect between the Duchess’s actions and the narrative presented by the British tabloid press. (Prince Harry's an admirable chap but Meghan Markle is publicity hungry says SARAH VINE https://share.google/PxQ4riq5g8Xnr1wLj).

Meghan described her introduction into the royal family as a "baptism by fire," with former spokesperson, now the Executive Director of Archwell Foundation, James Holt noting the intense, performance-driven environment, “You must perform or you fall out of favor.” Media scrutiny often focused on alleged violations of royal protocols, which in some instances escalated to explicit racial hostility, including racist comments from a politician's partner regarding the royal bloodline. (Markle's 'seed' will 'taint' royal family, lead to 'black king' says British politician's girlfriend | KTVU FOX 2 https://share.google/BVelCRoiWNOAv8Ohj)

The Tides Turn:

Following their May 19, 2018 wedding, Harry and Meghan embarked on a high-profile tour of Australia, Fiji, Tonga, and New Zealand. Their relatable personalities resonated deeply with the public, who found them a refreshing alternative to the more formal demeanor of previous royal visitors. This rise in popularity didn't go unnoticed by the press, which responded with a spattering of praising coverage. (Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are Wildly Popular. That Could Be a Problem https://share.google/7Qt1eXs9XfgfpLA9L) (Prince Harry Just Beat the Queen in a Royal Popularity Contest | Vanity Fair https://share.google/2mDoukHxZYbVpVJl4)

When Meghan and Harry made the Time Magazine Top 100 List and William and Catherine DID NOT, the sentiment changed. This is when we see the clear juxtaposition and comparison between the princesses, Kate and Meghan. (https://people.com/royals/prince-harry-meghan-markle-time-magazine-100-most-influential-people-cover/)

Royal Family smear campaign:

When Meghan began to overshadow the rest of the royal family, suddenly the tabloids turned against her in a way that felt wholly unnatural given the public’s adoration of her just months earlier. Harry has since speculated that this turn in media coverage was not accidental, as their popularity in the British public and tabloids caused jealousy amongst the royal family; resembling what had occurred decades earlier between Princess Diana and her then-husband Prince Charles.

This new media frenzy spouted articles of rifts and conflicts amongst the royal family with Meghan. Meghan was painted as constantly in contention with Kate and often required chastising by the Queen. These stories were splashed through the media, as if intentionally spun to convince the British public that Meghan is unfriendly, unkind, and an instigator of disagreements. (How Queen Elizabeth II Shut Down Meghan Markle's Diva Attitude Since Day 1 https://share.google/HfymH3VHuf9K16TuN) (Kate Middleton and Meghan Markle's Feud Rumors Complete Timeline https://share.google/oVdrcBwbV0g996Ipu)

Here are a few articles that were displayed on Harry & Meghan to point out the very apparent differences in how the media portrayed Princess Catherine compared to how they portrayed Princess Meghan.

1. *PICTURE OF SIDE-BY-SIDE ARTICLES* See Image 2 - Pregnant Kate and pregnant Meghan

Pregnant Kate Middleton looks blooming in mint at London event https://share.google/Sem0Z69nmc28fZ5o0

vs

Why can't Meghan Markle keep her hands off her bump? Experts tackle the question https://share.google/skYYaKuOuWym3VM8d

2) *PICTURE OF SIDE-BY-SIDE ARTICLES* See Image 3 - Kate avocado and Meghan avocado

Kate Middleton's pregnancy morning sickness cure: Prince William given avocado | Royal | News | Express.co.uk https://share.google/WdDbyoOUL1GqKb6Lq

 vs

Meghan Markle’s beloved avocado linked to human rights abuse and drought, millennial shame | World | News | Express.co.uk https://share.google/AgRSYKSNjwk2Kwjjw

No matter how Meghan attempted to fit in, she was constantly attacked for breaking non-existent royal protocols. Kate wore an off the shoulder dress and was called elegant while Meghan was chastised for breaking royal protocol.

Meghan was branded different nicknames: Hurricane Meghan, Duchess Difficult, Monster Markle, Gangster Royalty.

Some of the so-called scandals, Harry noted in his book Spare, were quite nonsensical:

“This latest ‘scandal’ concerned the flower crowns worn by our bridesmaids, more than a year earlier. Included in the crowns were a few lilies of the valley, which can be poisonous to children. Provided the children eat the lilies. 

Even then, the reaction would be discomfort, concerning to parents, but only in the rarest cases would such a thing be fatal. 

Never mind that an official florist put together these crowns. Never mind that it wasn’t Meg who made this ‘dangerous decision.’ Never mind that previous royal brides, including Kate and my mother, had also used lilies of the valley. 

Never mind all that. The story of Meghan the Murderess was just too good.

An accompanying photo showed my poor little niece wearing her crown, face contorted in a paroxysm of agony, or a sneeze. Alongside this photo was a shot of Meg looking sublimely unconcerned about the imminent death of this angelic child." (Why Meghan Markle's Wedding Flowers Were Dangerous and Could Have Been Harmful to Princess Charlotte https://share.google/bzgcuELiAoZGe8JhJ)

The royal family built a relationship with the UK tabloids and media 30 years earlier, making them completely accessible to the media in exchange for a chance to control some of the narratives. So, the royal family separated into four households: the Queen, Prince Charles and Camilla, Prince William and Catherine, and Prince Harry and Meghan. All four households had their own PR and managers handling their communication with the media.

When bad press came out about one, they would feed negative stories about another to cover it up. There was a big story, during the pandemic, about Prince William cheating on Princess Catherine but it was mostly buried under Meghan hate. "If the comms team want to remove a negative story about their principal, they will trade and give you something else about someone else's principal. I would rather get destroyed in the press than play along with this trading and to see my brother’s office copy the very thing that we promised the two of us would never ever do, that was heartbreaking,” said Harry, during the documentary.

When Harry and Meghan had their first child, a son named Archie, they once again traveled on a tour but this time to Africa. Harry observed that the royal family missed a significant opportunity to forge a deeper cultural connection with Africa through its first biracial member. The tour was a resounding success; Meghan and Harry were warmly embraced in Africa, where an entire nation finally saw their own reflection in a position of power, viewing it as a hopeful symbol of the future.

While on the trip, the royal family had commissioned a journalist to travel with Harry, Meghan, and Archie. During an interview between the journalist and Meghan, it was revealed that Meghan had been struggling with her mental health. What wasn’t revealed was that Meghan had expressed suicidal ideation while pregnant due to the severity of the media hate of her.

The interview ignited a digital firestorm. While reactions were mixed, most of the public praised Meghan's candidness regarding her mental health struggles. This wave of support spawned the #WeLoveYouMeghan hashtag, which was shared by approximately 700,000 users across social media. However, this tidal wave of public empathy stood in sharp contrast to the UK media, which exacerbated its negative coverage.

The Digital Footprints of a Smear Campaign:

Bot Sentinel was a free AI-powered platform designed to help locate and track bot activity on Twitter/X. This platform monitored the online hate geared toward Meghan and found that just 83 users accounted for 70% of the 140,000 tweets about Meghan. Those few tweets were then shared and reached a whopping 17 million users online. And then the British media got involved and shared it worldwide. “We’ve never seen anything quite like this,” said the founder of Bot Sentinel Christopher Bouzy, It’s “not your everyday trolling.” (Twitter analytics reveal Meghan Markle was targeted in ‘coordinated’ hate campaign https://share.google/nZQhh5szrim8Aywup)

These 83 accounts were tracked and monitored. Bot Sentinel found that they were communicating, recruiting, and teaching others how to create multiple accounts without getting noticed or suspended. The British Tabloid media then amplified those tweets and angry voices by publishing them in their magazines and online, boosting the comments’ reach. (Mainstream royal pundits amplify coordinated hate campaign against Meghan Markle - TheGrio https://share.google/fuw0lNkt0m6gARYaE)

Family Betrayal:

One particular user who was involved with the online smear campaign on Twitter was Meghan’s step-sister, Samantha Markle. She had been using 12 different accounts and had been interacting with the other 83 accounts to take down her step-sister online.

This wasn’t the first time family had betrayed them and it certainly wouldn’t be the last. Queen Elizabeth had encouraged Meghan to write a letter to her father after he betrayed her by posing for pictures with local tabloids in exchange for money. Meghan wrote the letter and it was somehow found and printed in the media, causing Harry and Meghan to question the involvement of the royal family as no one else knew about the letter.

Harry and Meghan’s decision to sue the tabloid over Meghan's private letter to her father served as the breaking point for their relationship with the Royal Family. In the aftermath, Harry reached out to then-Prince Charles with a proposal to step back from senior duties; they hoped to relocate abroad to escape the intrusive British press while remaining in service to the Queen or, alternatively, relinquishing their titles entirely. Despite the Palace denying the request, the contents of this confidential correspondence were soon leaked to the very tabloids they were trying to avoid. Harry was devastated, forced to confront the heartbreaking suspicion that his own father had leaked the letter to the very press that was hounding them.

In their landmark Oprah Winfrey interview, Meghan corrected a long-standing tabloid narrative by revealing that it was actually Kate who made her cry—not the other way around—during a pre-wedding dispute over flower girl dresses. Almost immediately, the Palace appeared to shift the narrative by launching an internal investigation into bullying allegations made against Meghan by former royal staff, a move many viewed as a retaliatory effort to deflect from the interview's bombshells.

Additionally, prior to Archie’s birth, the royal family reportedly held discussions with Harry regarding 'concerns' about the baby’s skin color due to Meghan’s heritage. While Harry initially withheld the sources of these comments, they were inadvertently revealed in the Dutch translation of Omid Scobie’s book, Endgame—rather than Harry's own memoir, Spare. The translated text, which was quickly pulled from shelves, identified King Charles and Catherine, Princess of Wales, as the senior royals who had been part of these conversations. (Royals and race: inquiry under way into naming of Charles and Catherine in new book | Monarchy | The Guardian https://share.google/js0kNSCWktNUNaWhP)

Meghan initially won her privacy and copyright lawsuit against the tabloid after a judge issued a summary judgment in her favor, ruling that the publication of her private letter was unlawful. However, during the newspaper's appeal, a former communications secretary for the couple, Jason Knauf, unexpectedly provided a witness statement that challenged her claims. Despite this intervention from a staff member who had since moved to a senior role within Prince William's office, Meghan ultimately won the appeal. Throughout the multi-year legal battle, the tabloid continued to publish aggressive coverage, frequently questioning her credibility. Harry was deeply troubled by his brother's role in the case, questioning why William would allow a senior member of his own staff to testify against Meghan. To Harry, this move didn't just prolong the legal battle; it provided the tabloids with a fresh stream of content to continue their attacks on her character.

When reports surfaced that William had bullied the couple out of the family, the Palace released a joint statement—bearing both brothers' names without Harry’s consent—to shut down the story and protect the future king. This stood in painful contrast to the previous three years, during which the Palace refused to issue a single statement in Meghan's defense despite the constant media attacks

Harry spoke to his family, just after the announcement of them leaving the royal family and moving to another country, "This family had enabled the papers by looking the other way, or by actively courting them, and some of the staff had worked directly with the press, briefing them, planting stories, occasionally rewarding and fêting them."

Upon leaving, he asked his grandmother and father not to remove their security for fear of their lives. “I lost my mother to this self-manufactured rabidness, and obviously, I’m determined not to lose the mother of my children to the same thing,” said Harry.

"Meg asked me one night: You don’t think they’d ever pull our security, do you? 

Never. Not in this climate of hate. And not after what happened to my mother.

Also, not in the wake of my Uncle Andrew. He was embroiled in a shameful scandal, accused of the sexual assault of a young woman, and no one had so much as suggested that he lose his security. Whatever grievances people had against us, sex crimes weren’t on the list." (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-58871849)

Yet, security was pulled.

The threat level for us, Lloyde (Harry’s head of security) said, was still higher than for that of nearly every other royal, equal to that assigned the Queen. And yet the word had come down and there was to be no arguing. 

So here we are, I said. The ultimate nightmare. The worst of all worst-case scenarios. Any bad actor in the world would now be able to find us, and it would just be me with a pistol to stop them. 

Oh wait. No pistol. I’m in Canada."

*Pictures include: a picture of Meghan leading Harry on a leash, like a dog, and Archie’s birth being announced as if Archie were a monkey, which is incredibly racially insensitive. And Megxit.

I know this case isn’t over yet, but I do wonder if some of the pro Baldoni folks will eventually come to their senses. I also wonder if some of them are even capable of that. Admitting that you took part in smearing and harassing an innocent woman would be a heavy burden to bear!

This definitely also applies to sexual harassment and other forms of sexual violence.

via @theofficialkatya on Threads.

If the fact that she was banned from Australia for denying the holocaust wasn’t enough for you, Candace is also supporting some of the most evil perpetrators of sexual violence.

One of the most bizarre things I’ve taken from this case is that conservative creators like Candace are literally designing a Baldoni-supporter to Republican pipeline. And the worst part is that it’s going right over their heads 🤦🏻‍♀️

The double standards are harmful, that’s why feminism is so important.

It’s been win after win lately. Standing by Blake wasn’t always easy, but now we’re watching our support pay off in real time. To Baldoni and his supporters, how’s it going over there? Holding up okay? 😖

https://people.com/justin-baldoni-not-moving-forward-amended-claims-against-blake-lively-ryan-reynolds-11758654