Your online life and social media posts, especially about your ex’s private parts, may get you in trouble in your divorce. A recent federal court decision involving former NFL player Matt Kalil and his social-media personality ex-wife Haley Kalil exposes a new way social media can harm you.

Protecting the Family Jewels
Matt was the fourth overall selection in the NFL Draft and played several seasons in the NFL. Haley was Miss Minnesota, and modeled for Sports Illustrated. They married in 2015 and divorced in 2022. 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.
In November 2025, fellow social-media content creator Marlon Lundgren Garcia collaborated with Haley on a livestream on the Twitch platform. During the livestream, the two discussed, among other things, Haley’s marriage and divorce.
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. During a discussion about her marriage and divorce though, she disclosed intimate information regarding their relationship and as they continued to talk, it quickly became obvious that Haley was referring to the size of Matt’s penis.
The conversation quickly attracted extensive media attention and online commentary. Matt and his current wife had to bear the brunt of the offensive direct messages and comments on their social media accounts. Matt sued.
Social Media and Divorce
The discovery of sensitive and personal evidence is routine in divorce. Sometimes we hire private investigators and sometimes evidence falls in your lap. Social media sites are often filled with very personal information which is increasingly being used in divorce trials.
I wrote an article discussing some of the challenges with authenticating social media evidence in divorce trials, and other evidentiary rules governing the admissibility of social media evidence. There is evidentiary potential in social media sites, and there are many challenges to authenticating material downloaded from the internet. Social media websites like Tik Tok, Instagram, and YouTube have had an astronomical growth worldwide, and clips are showing up in divorce trials. But is the evidence introduced into trial always admissible? That may depend on many factors.
District Court Ruling
Minnesota has a law similar to Florida’s prohibiting the publication of private facts. Generally, Matt had to show Haley gave publicity to information concerning his private life that would be highly offensive to a reasonable person; and was not of legitimate concern to the public.
In Matt’s case, the federal judge found the online conversation concerned Matt’s very private parts, and “without question” could reasonably be considered highly offensive. But the case turned on something else, were the statements legitimate public interest or public curiosity?
The other major distinction is that Matt and Haley were public figures. Matt was an NFL player – even though he retired – and his marriage to Haley created a connection to a person whose public profile had continued to grow dramatically after the divorce. Even though he was retired, that did not mean he wasn’t still a celebrity.
“But all of her comments about Matt’s penis size were in the context of describing the “trauma” she suffered during her marriage, the couple’s seeking help from doctors and therapists, and ultimately the couple’s decision to divorce. 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.”
For those reasons, the district court found 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. Haley’s motion to dismiss Matt’s complaint was granted and dismissed with prejudice and on the merits.
Although this was a tort case rather than a divorce decision, it presents an increasingly common issue arising in child custody and divorce cases. Marriages generate a lot of potentially publishable information. Today, your former spouse can reach millions of people instantly. Anyone who values confidentiality should consider addressing confidentiality in their case.
The U.S. District Court decision is here.




