FKA Twigs Reignites Legal Fight With Shia LaBeouf — Claims 'Illegal' NDA Tried To Silence Abuse Claims
She’s taking the battle back to court, arguing the agreement crossed a legal line designed to protect survivors.
FKA twigs is reopening her legal war with Shia LaBeouf – this time not over the alleged abuse itself, but over what she says came after it.
The singer, whose real name is Tahliah Barnett, has filed a new lawsuit in Los Angeles, claiming that a nondisclosure agreement tied to their previous settlement is illegal and unenforceable. The move marks a sharp escalation in a case that many believed had already been resolved behind closed doors.
At the center of the dispute is a clause that Barnett says goes too far – not just restricting her from discussing her own experiences, but preventing her from speaking about issues of sexual violence more broadly.
The legal push comes months after Barnett reached a settlement with LaBeouf over her 2020 lawsuit, which accused the actor of “relentless abuse.” While that case did not go to trial, the fallout has continued to ripple – now shifting into a fight over what survivors are legally allowed to say after a deal is signed.
According to the new filing, Barnett is seeking a court order blocking enforcement of parts of the NDA, arguing they violate California’s STAND Act – legislation designed to prevent powerful figures from using legal agreements to silence victims.
Her lawyer, Mathew Rosengart, framed the case as something bigger than a personal dispute.
“This action is about righting a wrong,” the complaint states, adding that it is also intended to protect other victims “who do not have the resources to speak out and defend themselves from predators.”
The dispute traces back to December, when LaBeouf’s legal team initiated arbitration proceedings, claiming Barnett had breached the settlement agreement. The alleged violation stemmed from a magazine interview in which she said she did not feel safe, even with that chapter of her life behind her.
That arbitration effort was later dropped in February – but Barnett’s new lawsuit suggests the underlying conflict never truly went away.
Instead, it has shifted into a more fundamental question about the limits of confidentiality agreements in cases involving abuse.
California law has increasingly moved against sweeping NDAs in this context. Since 2016, settlements cannot legally block disclosure of factual information related to criminal sexual conduct, and the STAND Act expanded those protections to cover harassment and assault claims more broadly.
Barnett argues that the agreement she signed crosses that line – restricting not just specific details, but her ability to speak at all.
LaBeouf’s side has pushed back on that interpretation, reportedly arguing the law does not apply because her original lawsuit centered on sexual battery rather than sexual assault – a distinction Barnett’s legal team calls both “preposterous” and legally flawed.
The case also revives details from the original lawsuit, which alleged a pattern of escalating abuse during their relationship after meeting in 2018.
According to the complaint, which included verbal and psychological harm that allegedly intensified into physical violence, with one incident describing Barnett being slammed against a car and strangled. The filing also claimed LaBeouf kept a loaded firearm by his bedside.
At the time, LaBeouf acknowledged harmful behavior in a statement, saying: “I have been abusive to myself and everyone around me for years… I’m ashamed of that history.”
The new lawsuit lands as LaBeouf faces separate legal trouble in New Orleans, where he has been charged with battery following an altercation at a bar. One of the men involved later described the incident as a hate crime.
For Barnett, however, the focus is now squarely on what she calls an attempt to silence her – and what that means for others in similar situations.
The complaint makes clear that this is not about financial damages. It is, in her words, “about justice and law, not money.”
And in a legal landscape still reshaped by the fallout of #MeToo – including high-profile cases like Britney Spears’ conservatorship battle, also led by Rosengart – the outcome could have implications far beyond this one dispute.
Because the real question sitting underneath this case is simple and explosive:
Once a settlement is signed… who gets to control the story?