President Donald Trump returned to the U.S. on Friday after a four-day Middle East trip filled with red carpets and opulence, only to set his sights – and ire – on two music legends and members of the U.S. Supreme Court in a series of angry social media comments to end the week.
In separate Truth Social posts on May 16, the president criticized both Bruce Springsteen and Taylor Swift, who are not only vocal critics but openly supported his Democratic presidential opponent, Kamala Harris. But later in the day, he slammed the Supreme Court after the majority of justices blocked the Trump administration’s effort to use a 1798 wartime law to deport a group of Venezuelan migrants.
Trump criticized the Supreme Court’s actions, writing on social media, “This is a bad and dangerous day for America!” The aggrieved president added that the ruling will encourage other criminals to enter the country, causing “great harm to our cherished American public.”
Trump calls Springsteen ‘obnoxious’ after comments at Manchester show
Trump’s rant didn’t start with SCOTUS. Earlier, he fired back at Springsteen after the 75-year-old rocker scrutinized the administration at the May 14 concert in Manchester, England.
“In my home, the America I love-the America I’ve written about that has been a beacon of hope and liberty for 250 years—is currently in the hands of a corrupt, incompetent, and treasonous administration,” Springsteen told the British crowd, according to videos shared online. “Tonight, we ask all who believe in democracy and the best of our American spirit to rise with us, raise your voices against authoritarianism and let freedom ring. This is ‘Land of Hope and Dreams.’
Despite Trump’s team previously using Springsteen songs at campaign rallies, the president insisted he has “never liked” the “Dancing In The Dark” singer. Not only did Trump call him “overrated,” but he insinuated that there would be consequences when the musician returns to the U.S.
“I see that Highly Overrated Bruce Springsteen goes to a Foreign Country to speak badly about the President of the United States,” he wrote. “Never liked him, never liked his music, or his Radical Left Politics and, importantly, he’s not a talented guy – Just a pushy, obnoxious JERK, who fervently supported Crooked Joe Biden, a mentally incompetent FOOL, and our WORST EVER President, who came close to destroying our Country.”
Swift also catches barbs after endorsing Kamala Harris
Trump also insinuated that Swift is overrated on Truth Social, writing less than an hour before his Springsteen post: “Has anyone noticed that, since I said ‘I HATE TAYLOR SWIFT,’ she’s no longer ‘HOT?'”
In September, the president wrote on social media that “I hate Taylor Swift,” following the Grammy winner’s endorsement of Harris in the 2024 presidential election.
The “You Need To Calm Down” singer endorsed Harris in an Instagram post immediately following the only general election debate between Trump and Harris. The pop star signed off the post, labeling herself a “Childless Cat Lady,” taking a jab at JD Vance’s now-viral comments about people who don’t have children.
More Than A Simple Favor: Judge Grants Blake Lively’s Request To Have “Improper” Taylor Swift Bullying Claims Tossed Out
Whether they like it or not, Blake Lively and Taylor Swift’s friendship and any bad blood between them this week became the heart of Lively’s ongoing legal battle with It Ends With Us co-star and director Justin Baldoni – but it didn’t last long.
On Wednesday, lawyers for Lively condemned allegations in a letter by Baldoni’s main attorney that the actress’ team threatened the “Shake It Off” superstar singer with a public drubbing if she didn’t offer a full-throated public support for her old pal as “scandalous” and “completely false.”
On Thursday, just after Bryan Freedman reiterated his claim about the requested support and threats to “release private text messages of a personal nature” if the recently subpoenaed Swift wasn’t publicly behind Lively, the judge in the multimillion-dollar suit between the IEWU stars shut the whole sideshow down.
“The Letter is improper and must be stricken,” ordered Judge Lewis J. Liman in response to a motion by Lively’s side filed mere hours after Freedman’s letter. “It is irrelevant to any issue before this Court and does not request any action from this Court.”
Liman (who, as we’ve mentioned before, is the brother of director Doug Liman) goes on to say of Freedman’s letter in his order: “It concerns a subpoena proceeding in the District of Columbia over which this Court has no authority. The sole purpose of the Letter is to ‘promote public scandal’ by advancing inflammatory accusations, on information and belief, against Lively and her counsel. It transparently invites a press uproar by suggesting that Lively and her counsel attempted to ‘extort’ a well-known celebrity. Retaining the Letter on the docket would be of no use to the Court and would allow the Court’s docket to serve as a ‘reservoir of libelous statements for press consumption.’ The same is true for the Wayfarer Parties’ subsequent submission, which the Court will strike sua sponte for the same reasons.”
“Counsel is advised that future misuse of the Court’s docket may be met with sanctions.”
That “subsequent submission” Judge Liman refers to is another letter from Freedman today that claims to name names – actually, one name specifically.
That name is attorney J. Douglas Baldridge.
A longtime lawyer for Swift, Baldridge is a partner out of Venables LLP’s DC office. Since 2023, the George Washington University Law School graduate has also been the general counsel for Swift’s 13 Management.
With Venables fighting the “abuse of the discovery process” subpoena, as the firm termed it in its own filing, that could drag itself and Swift into the the Lively-Baldoni brawl, Freedman offered more details of a potentially explosive call from February. Emphasizing the Super Bowl on February 9 that Swift attended but Lively was absent from, the claimed conversation appears to have sought to stamp out speculation that Swift was distancing herself from Lively due to the latter’s dust-up with Baldoni, his Wayfarer Studios, its execs and PR leaders Melissa Nathan and Jennifer Abel.
Citing his response to a voicemail from “a person very closely linked to Taylor Swift,” Freedman said in a corresponding affidavit: “During the February 14th phone call, which lasted approximately one hour, the speaker told me that they had been informed that J. Douglas Baldridge, counsel for Taylor Swift and a partner at Venable LLP, had received a phone call from Michael Gottlieb, counsel for Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds during which Mr. Gottlieb requested, on Ms. Lively’ s behalf, that Taylor Swift make a social media statement in support of Ms. Lively given her absence from the Super Bowl that year, and stated that if Ms. Swift failed to do so, Ms. Lively would release “ten years” of private texts with Ms. Swift. The individual also told me that they had been informed that Mr. Baldridge had accused Mr. Gottlieb of extortion and ended the call.”
Neither Baldridge nor reps for Swift responded to request for comment from Deadline on today’s filings, letters and Liman’s order. However, in response to the now struck filings Thursday by Baldoni’s side to have a motion for sanctions rebuffed, and before Liman ruled on the matter, Gottlieb had a new and strongly worded statement for Deadline.
“Another day, another bogus filing designed for click bait,” the Willkie Farr & Gallagher lawyer said.
“We reiterate our unequivocal denial, which Mr. Freedman has now admitted rely completely upon a source, no matter who it is, that doesn’t even claim to have witnessed the conversations that Freedman describes, making this triple-hearsay statement as unreliable as information reported from children in a game of telephone,” Gottlieb adds. “These claims remain completely untethered from reality—to be clear: the conversations as described did not happen, and we will hold Mr. Freedman accountable for his misconduct.”
Well-known to be close to Lively and the godmother to one of her children, IEWU soundtrack contributor Swift has made several cameos in various lawsuits and countersuits ever since Lively on December 20 filed her sexual harassment and retaliation complaint with California’s Civil Rights Department.
In addition to being brought on to the Sony-distributed film’s soundtrack, Swift had a walk-on at Lively’s NYC apartment at one point during production backing her friend’s script rewrites to a cowered Baldoni. Along with the volumes of text message released by all sides, Swift is also mentioned as a “dragon” for Lively in an exchange between Lively and Baldoni. Still, the subpoena issued earlier this month kicked it up a level or two for the scandal-adverse Swift coming off her record-breaking global Eras Tour that ended in December 2024.
Now, while the battle of the Swift subpoena continues in courtsl, it looks like all’s good between Lively and “Bad Blood” singer.
For Lively and Baldoni, with parties like the New York Times, Deadpool star Reynolds, various publicists and Lively herself seeking to be dismissed from the sprawling legal actions, the trial date of March 9, 2026 is still on the books.
Taylor Swift Reportedly Pauses Friendship With Blake Lively
Billionaire musician Taylor Swift has been enjoying a “break from the spotlight” after she completed her record-setting Eras Tour in late 2024, along with Kansas City Chiefs boyfriend Travis Kelce.
“They have been traveling nonstop and very much enjoy it,” a source told People. “They are making the most of their time off together. They are hanging out with friends, too. It’s a special time for them…They value the same things. Right now, the focus is very much on private time out of the spotlight.”
While she’s stayed away from the public eye, Swift’s name is still appearing in the headlines as Blake Lively’s lawsuits with It Ends With Us co-star Justin Baldoni rages on. Earlier this week the judge in the case made his ruling on a letter from Baldoni’s lawyer suggesting that the actress’ team threatened the “Shake It Off” singer with the release of private text messages if she didn’t offer public support for Lively.
“The Letter is improper and must be stricken,” ordered Judge Lewis J. Liman in response to a motion by Lively’s side filed mere hours after Freedman’s letter. “It is irrelevant to any issue before this Court and does not request any action from this Court.”
While Lively received a win, a new report suggests her friendship with Swift has been “halted” as a result of the lawsuit. “Their friendship has halted,” a source told People. “Taylor wants no part in this drama.”
A second source suggested the two are “taking some space,” but adds that they are “not no longer friends.”
Swift allegedly received a subpoena on May 8 in regards to the lawsuit that sparked the pause in the relationship.
Taylor Swift Wasn’t ‘Threatened’ by Blake Lively, Actor’s Lawyer Claims
A lawyer for Blake Lively squashed “false” claims made by Justin Baldoni‘s legal team, alleging she “threatened” Taylor Swift again, dragging their friendship into the feud. On Wednesday, Baldoni’s lawyer, Bryan Freedman, wrote a letter to the judge justifying their subpoena to Venable, the law firm that has represented the pop star for over a decade. According to a PEOPLE report, Freedman wrote that this could unveil Lively’s alleged “attempt to intimidate and coerce a percipient witness in this litigation.”
In response, Lively’s attorney, Mike Gottlieb, made a statement to the news outlet that same day, branding these claims “categorically false.” Additionally, Gottlieb denied Freedman’s allegation suggesting they “threatened” Swift or pressured her into releasing a statement of support for the actor.
Blake Lively’s lawyers dismiss claims made by Justin Baldoni’s side about Taylor Swift
Only days ago, Justin Baldoni served separate but similar subpoenas — in connection with the Blake Lively case — to Taylor Swift and her lawyers. Now, his legal team alleged that Lively “threatened” and pressured the singer into supporting her. However, these claims were denied by the “Gossip Girl” alum’s lawyers. In a statement to PEOPLE, Lively’s lawyer, Mike Gottlieb, remarked that they “unequivocally deny all of these so-called allegations,” dubbing them “categorically false” and “completely untethered from reality.”
Lively and Ryan Reynolds’ push back concerning the subpoenas to the Grammy winner and her lawyers at Venable prompted Baldoni’s lawyer to send a letter to the judge on Wednesday. In the letter, his lawyer, Bryan Freedman, cited a “source who is highly likely to have reliable information” to reveal that the couple’s attorneys “threatened” and “pressured” Swift’s legal team to “release a statement of support” amid her ongoing legal battle. Freedman’s claim also suggested that Lively was willing to release private text messages if they refused to do so.
Moreover, Gottlieb, the attorney representing Lively in the case, underscored the availability of reliable evidence to back these claims that seemingly targeted her and Swift’s friendship. Freedman noted that while there was no proof at the time, he believed that their subpoenas to Swift and Venable would produce communication that could help their case against Lively. On the other hand, Gottlieb assured that they “will imminently file motions with the court to hold these attorneys accountable for their misconduct here.”
Taylor Swift’s representative and Venable have previously criticized Baldoni’s team for serving them subpoenas in his legal battle against Lively.
