In a recent development, Justin Baldoni's legal team has criticized Ryan Reynolds for making a joke during the 50th anniversary of "Saturday Night Live" (SNL). The comment was perceived as a reference to the ongoing legal battle between Baldoni and Reynolds, along with his wife Blake Lively. This feud began in December when Lively sued Baldoni for sexual harassment allegations, leading to a countersuit from Baldoni. The lawyers for both parties are now engaged in a dispute over subpoenas for phone records, adding another layer of complexity to an already contentious situation.

Baldoni's attorney, Bryan Freedman, expressed disapproval of Reynolds' humor on SNL during an appearance on Billy Bush’s “Hot Mics” podcast. Freedman suggested that it was inappropriate to make light of such serious accusations. He stated that he found it surprising and unprecedented for someone whose spouse had faced sexual harassment to make jokes about the situation. The joke occurred during a question-and-answer segment hosted by Tina Fey and Amy Poehler, where Reynolds, seated next to Lively, stood up to ask a question, sparking laughter from the audience.

The legal conflict between the parties stems from Lively's lawsuit against Baldoni, accusing him of sexual harassment on the set of their film "It Ends With Us." She also alleged that Baldoni orchestrated a retaliatory smear campaign against her. In response, Baldoni denied these claims and filed a defamation suit against Lively and Reynolds, seeking $400 million in damages. The two lawsuits have since been combined into one case.

Freedman characterized Reynolds’ SNL joke as part of the ongoing legal strategy. Meanwhile, Baldoni's legal team is contesting subpoenas issued by Lively and Reynolds' attorneys for extensive phone records. These subpoenas request all call and text message data related to certain numbers over multiple years. Baldoni's attorneys argue that these requests are overly broad and invasive, noting that this is civil litigation, not a criminal investigation. They emphasized the excessive nature of the demands, which include real-time location information and web browsing history.

Lively and Reynolds' legal team countered that they are only seeking non-content records as allowed by law. They pointed out that Baldoni had initiated a lawsuit for a substantial sum, claiming a retaliatory campaign existed, yet seemed reluctant to provide evidence supporting his claims. A spokesperson for Lively commented that if Baldoni truly had evidence, there would be no reason to block the discovery process. The spokesperson further noted that if Baldoni had nothing to hide, he would not fear producing the requested information.

This latest exchange highlights the escalating tension between the parties involved. As the legal battle continues, both sides remain committed to their respective positions, with each party accusing the other of withholding crucial evidence. The outcome of this dispute will likely depend on how the court rules on the validity of the subpoenas and the broader implications for the case.