this week Legally WeRachael Bennett, specialist in family law and senior lawyer for a Sullivan Law & Associatesbreak it down if Haley Kalil has a valid argument dismiss his ex Matt Kalil’s lawsuit against his following comments he made about the size of his penis.
On Jan. 27, Haley, 33, asked the court to throw out the suit for invasion of privacy and unjust enrichment on her First Amendment right.
“People hear ‘First Amendment’ and think it’s a shield for anything you say. It really isn’t,” Bennett, who is not affiliated with the case, says exclusively. Us Weekly. “The Constitution protects opinions and speech on matters of public interest, but it does not automatically protect the dissemination of intimate details about a former spouse’s anatomy on the Internet.”
He adds: “Even if what he said is true, the question is whether those details were private, highly personal and shared without consent. If they were, that can support an invasion of privacy, and the truth doesn’t necessarily give you immunity here.”
The court documents said: “Plaintiff’s complaint seeks to hold a woman civilly liable for providing a truthful, autobiographical account of the sexual trauma she suffered and described as causing the end of a highly publicized celebrity marriage to an NFL football star.”
Haley’s attorney argued that allowing the case to proceed “would require this Court to radically expand state law causes of action beyond their recognized boundaries into territory fiercely protected by the First Amendment.”
Haley was married to Matt, 36, from 2015 to 2022. Three years after their split, Haley opened up about her past marriage in a November 2025 live stream where she claimed that the Matt’s penis size it was comparable to “two Coca-Cola (cans) stacked on top of each other” or “maybe even a third”, making physical intimacy “impossible”.

Matt’s attorney, Ryan Saba, said in a statement we“Haley Kalil’s motion to dismiss does not challenge the fact that she recklessly disclosed private and intimate details about Matt Kalil that resulted in widespread ridicule and unwanted attention. The motion completely ignores the point that a spouse has no right to expose private and confidential marital and sexual details for the purpose of profit. We hope the motion is fully granted.”
A judge has yet to make a decision.
“I think both sides have strong incentives to settle and not let this go to trial,” Bennett says. Us Weekly. “I don’t think either of them would want to be in a public trial that would force them to repeat the details of their previous sex lives. They’ve been divorced for about four years, she’s remarried, that would be awkward for everyone. If this were to be resolved, I would expect the settlement agreement to include a gag order to prevent any future public disclosure by Haley.”
For a full rundown of Legally Us, watch the video above.




