Justin Baldoni suffered a setback when a judge threw out his 0 million defamation case against Blake Lively. Despite this, legal experts have explained to Page Six why he is not completely out of options.

Nicole Page, a partner at Reavis Page Jump LLP, explains that if the “It Ends With Us” actress, 37, were to make a “new public statement” about her former co-star that he believes is defamatory, Baldoni could once again bring on a defamation suit as long as he files it within the one-year statute of limitations.

However, as entertainment and liable attorney Tre Lovell points out, Baldoni, 41, may not even need to rely on Lively making a new defamatory remark to pursue further legal action given that the judge is allowing him to amend four out of the seven claims in his original countersuit, which also included false light invasion of privacy, promissory fraud and others.

Attorney Alphonse Provinziano agrees, “Right now, the court has allowed them to amend their pleadings on defamation-related claims, meaning the lawsuit is still alive.”

Bryan Freedman, who represents Baldoni in his ongoing legal battle, reiterated those beliefs in a public statement Tuesday.

“While the Court dismissed the defamation related claims, the Court has invited us to amend four out of the seven claims against Ms. Lively, which will showcase additional evidence and refined allegations,” he clarified.

“This case is about false accusations of sexual harassment and retaliation and a nonexistent smear campaign, which Ms. Lively’s own team conveniently describes as ‘untraceable’ because they cannot prove what never happened.”

However, Camron Dowlatshahi of Los Angeles-based MSD Lawyers tells us that even if Baldoni chooses to file an amended complaint, it will “likely face another motion to dismiss.”

“It remains to be seen whether Baldoni can get to the discovery stage of his case,” he says.

Our legal experts agree Lively’s latest legal victory does not mean she has won the whole war, though.

“Lively will still have to provide evidence in support of her allegations that Baldoni sexually harassed her in order to succeed on her claims,” Page, an entertainment, employment and labor lawyer, says.

Michael Elkins, Esq., partner and founder at MLE Law, agrees, “I think Lively has an uphill battle in her claim for sexual harassment.”

Lovell further explains why the “Gossip Girl” alum may still face hurdles inside the courtroom come March 2026 when she pleads her case that Baldoni’s behavior, particularly on set, constituted as sexual harassment.

“Alleging sexual harassment on a movie set where the film is about domestic violence and the actor’s job to improvise and perform scenes in accordance with the subject matter will make this case much more difficult to prove than a typical work-place of employment scenario,” he says.

Neama Rahmani, president of Los Angeles-based West Coast Trial Lawyers, thinks the judge’s latest ruling has had an impact on Lively’s trial next year because it now puts Baldoni at a disadvantage.

“Things are looking bad for him in the courtroom because now he is playing defense and not offense,” he says, calling the dismissal a “huge win” for Lively and her team.

Rahmani adds, “The judge ruled that even if Lively tried to steal creative control of the film, that is not civil extortion. It was just hard bargaining and renegotiation, and Baldoni can’t prove he was harmed by it.”

Despite there still being a lot of uncertainty as to what will happen next, Lively is in a celebratory mood.

Her lawyers Esra Hudson and Mike Gottlieb told Page Six Monday, “Today’s opinion is a total victory and a complete vindication for Blake Lively, along with those that Justin Baldoni and the Wayfarer Parties dragged into their retaliatory lawsuit, including Ryan Reynolds.

“As we have said from day one, this ‘$400 million’ lawsuit was a sham, and the Court saw right through it.”