MINNEAPOLIS — A lawsuit filed by former Minnesota Viking offensive lineman Matt Kalil has been thrown out by a judge who rejected his claims that his privacy was invaded by his ex-wife discussing their sex life and his genitalia on a social media livestream.

U.S. District Judge Patrick Schiltz sided with popular social media influencer Haley Kalil in dismissing the NFL Pro Bowl player’s suit, ruling that her remarks were tied to subjects of public interest — including her life, marriage and the couple’s divorce.

Haley, a former Miss Minnesota, is a successful social media influencer with millions of followers on YouTube, Instagram and TikTok. The pair met while Matt played for the Vikings and were married in 2015. They divorced in 2022.

The interview at the heart of the lawsuit occurred last year with a content creator, during which Haley described Matt as the “greatest guy in the world” and her “best friend” with whom she shared a happy and meaningful marriage.

The conversation veered toward the couple’s divorce, to which Haley said sexual intercourse was virtually impossible and that her husband fell into “.01 percent of the population” that would leave her “in tears.” At one point, she compared his anatomy to “two Coke cans, maybe even a third.”

In his lawsuit, filed Jan. 6, Matt argued that the discussion on a public livestream viewed by millions of people was not protected speech under the First Amendment. He also argued that his ex-wife profited off the notoriety she received from the interview.

Matt, the No. 4 pick for the Vikings in the 2012 draft, said he has tried to live a private life after their divorce and has since remarried and has a young child.

Schiltz concluded Haley’s comments were permissible, saying she shared the information while talking about her own marriage, health and divorce — in which “her millions of followers have a legitimate interest.”

“If the only source of Matt’s celebrity was his career as a football player — and if Haley was just a random social‐media maven who passed on gossip about the size of Matt’s penis to get a laugh or to attract attention — then the Court would readily find that Haley’s comments were not of legitimate public concern,” Schiltz wrote.

“For these reasons, the Court finds that Haley’s remarks about the size of Matt’s penis and its impact on her health and marriage were remarks about a matter of legitimate public concern,” Schiltz wrote.

In a brief footnote, Schiltz dismissed Matt’s claim that his Haley profited unfairly from her comments, saying there was “nothing unjust” about her making money off a livestream as a result of her statements.

Schiltz said he acknowledged that Haley giggled about her comments and had the “demeanor of a teenager telling a dirty joke,” but said ultimately her remarks about her husband’s genitalia were in the context of the “trauma” she claimed to suffer during her marriage.

“In short, Haley was discussing her life, not Matt’s, and the law generally protects a person’s speech about herself, even though such speech inevitably reveals details about others,” Schiltz said.

The Minnesota Star Tribune has contacted Matt’s attorneys for comment.

Matt Bialick, lead attorney for Haley, said in a statement that they were pleased about the dismissal.

“No woman should need her ex-husband’s permission to tell the story of her own marriage,” the statement said. “No woman should be sued for talking about her own body. We hope this ruling gives women everywhere the confidence to share their own stories.”

———

Jeff Day of the Minnesota Star Tribune contributed to this report

©2026 The Minnesota Star Tribune. Visit startribune.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC