Influencer Haley Kalil's Remarks About Ex-Husband Matt Kalil's Penis Size Were "Newsworthy," and Thus Not Tortious

Read the original at Reason ↗
Reason · collected 2026-09-17 · by Eugene Volokh

Quick Summary

Judge Patrick Schiltz ruled in a Minnesota court case that influencer Haley Kalil’s comments about her ex-husband Matt Kalil’s penis size during a livestream were not defamatory. The incident occurred on November 2025 when Haley was collaborating with Marlon Lundgren Garcia on Twitch, discussing the reasons for her divorce without naming Matt but clearly referencing his physical attributes. Despite the personal nature of the comments, the judge deemed them newsworthy and thus not legally tortious.
Written locally by qwen2.5:14b on 2026-09-18, using this article's own text rather than the other coverage of the same event (that is the story summary below).

AI analysis runs on qwen2.5:14b, locally

Story summary

In January 2026, Haley Kalil, an influential social media content creator with millions of followers across platforms like TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, Snapchat, and Threads, was involved in a legal dispute with her ex-husband Matt Kalil, a former professional football player. On Twitch in November 2025, Haley made comments about Matt's penis size during a livestream collaboration with another influencer, Marlon Lundgren Garcia, suggesting it played "the biggest factor" in their divorce. In January 2026, Judge Patrick Schiltz of the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota dismissed Matt’s lawsuit against Haley, ruling that her statements were protected speech as they pertained to matters of legitimate public concern regarding her personal life and marriage. The court noted under Minnesota law that Haley's comments, though potentially offensive, did not constitute an invasion of privacy since they concerned a matter of public interest. Matt Kalil's legal team from Rosen Saba LLP stated their intention to appeal the decision.

Written for “Influencer Lawsuit Dismissed” on 2026-09-18, grounded in this article and the 1 other(s) covering the same event.
Why this leaning score
This article does not take a side on a contested political question, so it has no leaning score. That is an answer rather than a gap: a match report or a rescue can be warmly or critically written without being left or right, and scoring it anyway is how approval of a subject gets recorded as a political position.
No political leaning scored for article 17235 · logged 2026-09-18

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
70
claim-shaped sentences
Uncertain
6%
4 of 70 hedged
Leaning
not political
takes no side on a contested political question
Correction & hedging signals
92.8
corrections and hedging in what we collected; not a measure of accuracy
Outlets on this story
2
Entertainment
Narrative spread
1
articles carrying this framing
Analyzed 2026-09-18 · how these are computed

Story

📰 Influencer Lawsuit Dismissed
Entertainment · 2 article(s) covering the same event. See how they differ ↓

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Compared with similar articles

This article reads unscored and hedges 6% of its claims. Each row says how that neighbour differs.
New York Post
⚖️ leaning not scored 🔴 0% hedged 0 of 4 📰 publisher trust 59
“Both articles discuss the same legal ruling dismissing Matt Kalil's lawsuit against his ex-wife Haley Baylee regarding her comments about their sex life and anatomy on January 6, 2026.”

Publisher

Reason · 217 article(s) · 1 correction(s) detected
Running correction rate · 1 correction(s)
2026-09-05
Lawyers' Responsibility for Hallucinations in Briefs That They Sign

Who wrote this

Eugene Volokh
63 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 The court rejected Matt's disclosure of private facts claim: Under Minnesota law, "[p]ublication of private facts is an invasion of privacy when one gives publicity to a matter concerning the private life of another if the matter publicized is of a kind that (a) would be highly offensive to a reasonable person, and (b) is not of legitimate concern to the public."
🔮 After arresting a suspect, officers may search his person for weapons or evidence without a warrant or any further justification.
🔮 Along the way, they consider why describing an ending differs from posting a clip, how leaks of unpublished material complicate the analysis, and when a spoiler might cross the line from bad manners to legal liability.
🔮 These exercises were part of a youth summer camp called Wille und Macht (Will and Might), sponsored by the Friends of the New Germany, the largest Nazi organization in America, with more than ten thousand members.
2026-09-16 · assertive framing · The Anti-Nazi Law
🔮 I'm delighted to welcome Prof. Samantha Barbas (Iowa), who will be guest-blogging this week and next about her new book.
🔮 These gag orders, first promulgated by the Postmaster General in the late 19th century and later expanded by executive orders issued by Theodore Roosevelt and William Taft, prohibited civil servants from petitioning or giving information to Congress, or advocating for improved pay or working conditions except through their departmental head.
🔮 Furthermore, the teachers suggested that similar buddy activities would be provided in the future without notice and an opportunity to opt out.
🔮 Under subsection B of Oklahoma H.B. 1775, public-school employees may not "require or make part of a course" any of eight prohibited "concepts."
🔮 It also relies on a populist sensibility that separates its supporters—"the people"—from those who would indoctrinate them.
🔮 As Defendant's counsel conceded on the record at the April 28 Conference, the fair report privilege is contextual and depends on whether a reader would understand that a statement refers to the background or findings of a proceeding.
Also by Eugene Volokh
Open Thread
2026-09-17 · Reason
The Anti-Nazi Law
2026-09-16 · Reason
Nothing else under this byline is closely related to this article, so these are simply their most recent.
All 63 articles by Eugene Volokh →

Topics

D. Minn. Instagram TikTok Twitch YouTube

Subjects

Haley PERSON · 24× Garcia PERSON · 13× Matt PERSON · 5× YouTube ORG · 3× Instagram ORG · 2× Kalil PERSON · 2× TikTok ORG · 2× Twitch ORG · 2× D. Minn. GPE · 1× Patrick Schiltz PERSON · 1×

Narrative

E.g., Carlisle (granting demurrer in case regarding a plaintiff's decades-old teenage marriage to a famous actress); Michaels v. Internet Ent. Group, Inc. (C.D. Cal. 1998) (noting that while actor Pamela Anderson and musician Brett Michaels "must tolerate some public exposure of the fact of their romantic involvement," graphic "visual and aural details of their sexual relations" are not of public concern); see also Jackson v. Mayweather (Cal. Ct. App. 2017) (famous boxer's disclosure of ex-girlfriend's alleged abortion and plastic surgery were of public concern but copies of a sonogram and medical record were not).}
framing: assertive · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-09-18
🔮 The court rejected Matt's disclosure of private facts claim: Under Minnesota law, "[p]ublication of private facts is an invasion of privacy when one gives publicity to a matter concerning the private life of another if the matter publicized is of a kind that (a) would be highly offensive to a reasonable person, and (b) is not of legitimate concern to the public."

Claims (70 extracted, 4 hedged)

Plaintiff Matt Kalil ("Matt"), a former professional football player, and defendant Haley Kalil ("Haley"), a popular social-media content creator, used to be married…. asserted
Plaintiff → use → ?
As of January 6, 2026, Haley had 15.9 million TikTok followers, 9.3 million Instagram followers, 8.07 million YouTube subscribers, 1.6 million Snapchat followers, and 1.3 million Threads followers. asserted
Haley → have → followers
Following her rise to fame, Haley hosted the pre-Met Gala red carpet for E! News and secured similar gigs at the Tony and Academy Awards; collaborated with stars such as the Jonas Brothers, Courtney Cox, and Ed Sheeran; was nominated for a "Streamy Award" for a sketch featuring actor Jared Leto; made Time Magazine's list of Top 100 Creators 2025; and spoke at the 2025 Creator Marketing Summit. In November 2025, fellow social-media content creator Marlon Lundgren Garcia collaborated with Haley on a livestream on the Twitch platform ("the livestream"). asserted
Garcia → follow → platform
At the time this lawsuit was filed, Garcia had 1.5 million Twitch followers, 3.7 million Instagram followers, 4.6 million TikTok followers, and 766,000 YouTube subscribers. asserted
Garcia → file → followers
Haley joined Garcia in person in Minnesota, as part of Garcia's "Mar-Athon" challenge to visit all 50 states in 28 days. asserted
Haley → join → days
The livestream was uploaded to YouTube and memorialized in a video titled "I Opened Up To Haylee Baylee." asserted
I → upload → Baylee
During the livestream, Garcia and Haley sat across from one another at a small table in Garcia's recreational vehicle, and the two discussed, among other things, Haley's marriage and divorce. asserted
two → sit → marriage
Without using Matt's name, Haley said that she and her (only) ex-husband are "still friends," that he is the "greatest guy in the world," and that he is "doing good" and is remarried with a baby. asserted
he → use → baby
Although Haley and Matt had been "best friends," Haley explained, he wanted kids, and she was not ready. asserted
she → explain → kids
She noted that the two had "a couple other issues" that led to the decision to end their marriage. asserted
that → note → marriage
After Garcia asked Haley a few more questions about her marriage and its dissolution, Haley typed a private message to Garcia into her phone—ostensibly to put the reasons for her divorce "into perspective." asserted
Haley → ask → perspective
As she typed, Haley remarked that Garcia's face was "going to be hilarious" when he read the message. asserted
he → type → message
After reading the private message, Garcia thrice repeated "shut the fuck up." asserted
Garcia → read → fuck
Haley, nodding and smiling, said that she was being serious and that she tried "it all …. asserted
she → nod → it
Haley joked that her "life is a comedy and it writes itself," and confirmed that the issue described in the private message was "the biggest factor" in the divorce. asserted
issue → joke → divorce
As Garcia and Haley continued to talk, it quickly became obvious that Haley was referring to the size of Matt's penis. asserted
Haley → continue → penis
"[H]e's like 0.01 percent of the population, okay," Haley said, adding that "[w]e tried everything … you're going to be in tears type of shit." asserted
you → say → shit
Garcia responded: "That's like one of the craziest stories I've heard." asserted
I → respond → stories
Haley characterized the experience as involving "trauma I can't put on the Internet," but said that it was "just bad luck." asserted
it → characterize → Internet
Again, Haley insisted that her ex-husband is "such a good person" and "a really good guy." asserted
husband → insist → ?
Later, as Garcia typed a private question for Haley, they both assured their livestream audience that the secrets they were discussing (which at this point weren't too secret) were "nothing crazy"—but Haley sheepishly noted the irony that they were saying so "as we giggle and type into a phone." asserted
we → type → phone
In response to the new private message, Haley acknowledged that a certain aspect of Matt's penis was "[t]otally fine" and "like, average," but she then said (moving her hands along a horizontal plane) that "he was just … like two [C]oke cans stacked on top each other. asserted
he → acknowledge → other
Haley typed a final private message for Garcia, who remarked "[o]h my God," before Haley said that it was "like a funny joke to us now … you just have to laugh at it." asserted
you → type → it
After a bit more conversation, the segment wrapped up with Haley once more commending Matt, whom she credited with inspiring her "to be a way better person." asserted
she → wrap → her
"After I got divorced," Haley explained, she thought "[d]amn, I'm going to be like him. asserted
I → divorce → him
Meanwhile, comments from live viewers poured in, mostly about the thinly veiled topic of the private messages. asserted
comments → pour → messages
Media reaction soon followed. asserted
reaction → follow → ?
Headlines included "Haley Kalil Says NFL Husband's Size Sparked Divorce, 'Two Coke Cans'" and "Influencer Haley Baylee insists she 'cares deeply' about ex Matt Kalil's privacy despite wild penis confession." asserted
she → include → confession
Some media reports focused more on Matt, such as reports that "Ex-NFL Star Matt Kalil's 'Size' was Known Among Players" and that Matt got a "$300k offer from adult site after influencer ex admits their marriage ended due to his penis size." asserted
marriage → focus → size
Matt and his current wife had to bear the brunt of offensive direct messages and comments on their social-media accounts. asserted
Matt → have → accounts
Haley conducted a follow-up interview with the publication Page Six, in which she remarked that it was "unfortunate that only one fragment [of the livestream was] being amplified, because it doesn't capture the full story of how meaningful things were to me." asserted
things → conduct → me
The court rejected Matt's disclosure of private facts claim: Under Minnesota law, "[p]ublication of private facts is an invasion of privacy when one gives publicity to a matter concerning the private life of another if the matter publicized is of a kind that (a) would be highly offensive to a reasonable person, and (b) is not of legitimate concern to the public." uncertain
matter → reject → public
Without question, Matt has plausibly alleged that Haley's comments about his penis were publicized, were about a matter concerning Matt's private life, and would be highly offensive to a reasonable person. asserted
comments → allege → person
The only question is whether the facts disclosed by Haley were of legitimate public concern. asserted
facts → disclose → concern
To be more specific, the question is whether those facts were of legitimate public concern, as the media attention given to the facts clearly demonstrates that they were of public concern. asserted
they → give → concern
The parties agree that determining whether a matter is of legitimate public concern is a question of law for the Court… asserted
matter → agree → Court
It is clear that matters of legitimate public concern are not limited to traditional "news" items—that is, to items that would typically appear on the front page of a newspaper or lead the evening news on television. asserted
that → limit → television
E.g., Carlisle v. Fawcett Publ'ns, Inc. (Cal. Ct. App. 1962) ("[T]here is a public interest which attaches to people who, by their accomplishments, mode of living, professional standing or calling, create a legitimate and widespread attention to their activities."). asserted
who → attach → activities
One of the most famous works of history—Suetonius's The Lives of the Twelve Caesars, written in 121—is a notoriously gossipy collection of biographies of 12 leaders of ancient Rome that includes many details about their sex lives. asserted
that → write → lives
Then as now, a celebrity "relinquishe[s] a part of his right of privacy to the extent that the public has a legitimate interest in his doings, affairs, or character. asserted
public → relinquishe[ → doings
…and 30 more, not listed.
💬 Give feedback
🕘 History 🎫 Support