Tyra Banks filed a defamation lawsuit against Netflix on Saturday, claiming that her portrayal in the America’s Next Top Model docuseries, Reality Check, which the streamer released in February, was edited to support a false narrative.
In the suit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Banks’ attorneys say she participated in a three-and-a-half-hour interview about the show’s legacy and decisions she would approach differently today. But, the suit claims, just 16 minutes of her comments were used in the three-part docuseries and they were”stripped of context andreassembled to support a false and defamatory narrative unrelated to what sheactually expressed.” Her lawyers argue that the accountability she took for some of Top Model‘s most controversial moments was edited out.
“Worse, the false narrative the producers constructed — throughselective editing, deliberate omission and surgical manipulation of continuousfootage — included that Ms. Banks knowingly allowed a contestant to be sexuallyassaulted on her show, exploited that contestant’s trauma for ratings and then couldnot even remember it when asked,” the lawsuit states. “That narrative about Ms. Banks is a completefabrication —one that Netflix streamed to a global audience of millions.”
Specifically, the lawsuit takes issue with how Banks is shown responding to cycle two contestant Shandi Sullivan’s alleged sexual assault, which she discusses in the show, saying she was blacked out when she’s shown getting into bed with a male model and accusing the shows production team of framing the incident as her cheating on her boyfriend instead of what she considered to be assault.
When Banks is asked about Sullivan in Reality Check, she claims she had no involvement in production and editing on the series and was unaware that Sullivan viewers what happened to her as assault. Indeed, she’s shown being asked “You remember the story with Shandi?” and Banks responds “um,” before the screen cuts to black, creating a “devastating and deliberate” implication that Banks couldn’t remember the assault.
“But that was false,” Banks’ attorneys claim. “The full footage of Ms. Banks’ interview reveals two things that the producers cut out and did not show viewers in Episode 1: before the upward glance, Ms. Banks nods—affirmatively, unmistakably—and immediately says, ‘I do remember her story.’ By carving the nod out of the middle of the sequence and cutting off Ms. Banks’ comment at the end, the producers ensured that viewers would see only the lie and not the truth.”
“Defendants edited the Netflix Series to make it appear that Ms. Banks knew she was being asked about a sexual assault and was intentionally trying to evade the topic,” the lawsuit states. “Ms. Banks respects Ms. Sullivan’s perspective and the courage it takes for Ms. Sullivan and others to speak up.”
“Ms. Banks wishes somebody involved with the Netflix series would have told her what Ms. Sullivan shared with them,” the suit continues. “But they deliberately chose not to.”
In the lawsuit, Banks also responds to the “hurtful” allegations that she hadn’t gotten in touch with Top Model judge Miss J Alexander after his stroke, which he opens up about on the docuseries.
“Had the producers informed Ms. Banks that part of the Netflix series narrative would include Miss J saying that Ms. Banks never visited him in the hospital, Ms. Banks would have explained that she had been living in Australia for two-and-a-half years,” the lawsuit states.
And, the suit contends, she would have shown text chains with Miss J and his family, revealing how she tried to get in touch with him, after she heard of his stroke.
“She would have shown how hard she tried to get in touch with Miss J personally when she had initially heard the news of his stroke,” the suit states. “And she would have shown the text message that arrived from Miss J’s family member who eventually texted back months later and apologized for not responding to Ms. Banks’ texts and multiple calls sooner due to her being focused on getting him better.
“Ms. Banks would have explained that after that contact, she and Miss J spent three years communicating. They spoke live on the phone at least once. They exchanged voice notes, many photos, and video messages,” the lawsuit continues. “They texted numerous times. As recently as Christmas Day 2025, Ms. Banks and Miss J exchanged holiday messages and he updated Ms. Banks about his improved health. She replied, “Yesssssss Can we speak this week?” They never spoke. Just weeks later, the Netflix Series streamed to a worldwide audience.”
The suit claims the docuseries caused “significant harm and damage” to Banks’ personal brand. The suit contends online ratings for her SMIZE & DREAM ice cream business have “plummeted” since the docuseries aired.
In the suit, Banks’ lawyers claim she’s likely to suffer economic damage including “loss of future business opportunities, loss of business income, other compounding losses as will be shown at trial.”
Banks is requesting a jury trial to determine the amount she should be awarded in damages.
Netflix has not yet responded to The Hollywood Reporter‘s request for comment.