“Two Coke Cans” Viral Penis Comments By Influencer Haley Kalil & ex-wife of Former NFL Star’s lineman Matt Kalil Why Matt Kalil Is Suing His Ex-Wife Small Penis Size
Former NFL offensive lineman Matt Kalil filed a lawsuit on January 6, 2026, against his ex-wife, influencer Haley Kalil, for invasion of privacy and unjust enrichment after she publicly compared his penis size to “two Coke cans, maybe even a third” during a viral Twitch livestream in November 2025. The lawsuit alleges Haley disclosed “highly intimate and private facts” about his anatomy that left her “in tears” during sex, claiming this was the main reason their marriage ended in 2022. Matt is seeking damages exceeding $75,000 and requesting a jury trial, arguing her comments subjected him to “unwanted attention and invasive commentary” while she profited from increased social media engagement and monetization.
Picture this: You’re trying to live a quiet life after retiring from the NFL. You’ve remarried, you’ve got a baby, you’re running a tequila business with your brother. Life’s good. Private.
Then your ex-wife goes on a Twitch livestream with 16 million TikTok followers and tells the entire internet that your penis is the size of “two Coke cans, maybe even a third”—and that’s why your marriage imploded.
Welcome to Matt Kalil’s nightmare.
What Exactly Did Haley Say on That Livestream?
In November 2025, Haley Kalil—a Sports Illustrated model turned social media influencer—appeared on streamer Marlon Garcia’s “Mar-Athon” livestream. During what seemed like casual banter, she dropped a bombshell about her marriage to the 6-foot-7, 315-pound former Pro Bowler.
When Marlon asked about relationship struggles, Haley didn’t hold back.
“Listen, I tried it all,” she said on the stream, describing their attempts to make intimacy work. “Therapists, doctors. Not even lying. Looked up, like, lypo type s—, you know what I mean?”
Then came the comparison heard around the internet: Matt’s anatomy was like “two Coke cans on top of each other, maybe even a third.”
She claimed he was in the “.01 percent of the population” in terms of size. When Marlon followed up asking if that was “the biggest factor” in their issues, Haley confirmed it was.
“We’ve tried, impossible unless you’re going to be in tears-type s—,” she added, explaining their seven-year marriage included constant attempts to solve what she described as a painful physical incompatibility.
The kicker? She said all this with a laugh, calling her life “a comedy” that “writes itself.”
Why This Went From Awkward to Legal Fast
The video went absolutely viral. And not in the fun way.
Within days, the clip had exploded across social media platforms. People were searching Matt’s name, digging through his Instagram, speculating about his current wife. The attention became so intense that Matt reportedly deleted all his Instagram photos in what appeared to be damage control.
But the real problem, according to the lawsuit filed Tuesday in California Superior Court, wasn’t just embarrassment. It was the aftermath.
Matt claims his new wife, Keilani Asmus (a model he married in 2024 and shares a one-year-old son with), started receiving “increasingly frequent, disturbing, and alarming in nature” messages. Court documents included screenshots of invasive questions about her relationship with Matt.
His family members were “forced to endure the ongoing public circulation of these degrading and deeply personal statements,” the lawsuit states.
And here’s where it gets legally interesting: while Matt dealt with public humiliation and his wife fielded creepy messages, Haley’s social media was booming. The lawsuit alleges she “received substantial financial benefit, increased viewership, increased engagement, and monetization through various social media platforms and media coverage.”
Translation: She made money off talking about his private parts.
The Legal Claims: What Matt Is Actually Suing For
The Matt Kalil lawsuit isn’t about defamation—meaning he’s not claiming she lied. It’s about two different legal theories that don’t require proving the statements were false.
Invasion of Privacy (Public Disclosure of Private Facts)
This is the main claim. In California, you can sue someone for revealing deeply private information that would be highly offensive to a reasonable person and isn’t newsworthy or in the public interest.
The lawsuit argues that penis size and painful sex details are exactly the kind of “highly intimate and private facts regarding Plaintiff’s physical person and sexual life” that should never be broadcast to millions without consent.
Unlike defamation, this claim doesn’t care if what Haley said was true. The question is: Was it private? Was it offensive? And did the public have any legitimate need to know?
Matt’s lawyers are betting the answer is yes, yes, and hell no.
Unjust Enrichment
This claim focuses on the money angle. The lawsuit alleges that while Matt suffered reputational damage and his family endured harassment, Haley profited from the viral attention.
With over 9 million Instagram followers and 16 million on TikTok, influencers like Haley earn money through engagement—views, likes, comments, shares. The lawsuit argues she shouldn’t get to profit from revealing someone else’s most intimate details without their permission.
It’s basically saying: You made money off my pain and humiliation, and that’s not fair.
What Makes This Case So Complicated
Here’s the thing—Haley’s defense team isn’t backing down. Her attorney, Matthew Bialick, called the lawsuit “legally unsupported” in a statement to People magazine on January 7.
“The claims seek to dramatically expand existing law and establish damaging new precedent by imposing liability on a woman for merely speaking openly and truthfully about a prior relationship,” Bialick said. “That raises serious First Amendment concerns, especially in a case involving two public figures.”
And he’s got a point. Both Matt and Haley are public figures—he’s a former NFL Pro Bowler, she’s a model and influencer. The First Amendment generally gives public figures more leeway to discuss their own experiences, even uncomfortable ones.
Haley’s team plans to “immediately move to dismiss” the lawsuit.
The “She Also Said Nice Things” Defense
In her statement to TMZ Sports on January 6, Haley said she was “genuinely shocked and incredibly hurt” by the lawsuit.
“The truth is in the original livestream—which is still live on Marlon’s YouTube account,” she said. “I speak highly of him in multiple ways throughout that conversation.”
And she’s not wrong. During the same stream, Haley called Matt the “greatest guy in the world” and a “really good person” she wanted the best for. She insisted there was no ill will.
But Matt’s lawyers would argue: You can’t neutralize revealing someone’s penis size by also saying they’re a nice guy. The damage is done.
How Public Figure Status Affects This Case
In celebrity defamation cases, proving “actual malice”—meaning the person knew the statement was false or recklessly disregarded the truth—is required. That’s a high bar and one reason why famous people rarely win defamation suits.
But here’s the twist: This isn’t a defamation case.
Privacy torts in California use a different standard. According to legal analysis from Lawyer Monthly, the test is “offensiveness + non-newsworthiness,” not actual malice.
That means Matt doesn’t have to prove Haley was malicious or lying. He just has to prove:
- The information was private
- The disclosure would be offensive to a reasonable person
- It wasn’t newsworthy or in the public interest
- It caused him harm
California has some of the strongest privacy protections in the U.S., especially when disclosures happen during monetized content rather than genuine public interest reporting.
The fact that this occurred during a commercial livestream—not a news interview about relationship health or a documentary on divorce—strengthens Matt’s argument.
What Damages Is Matt Seeking?
The lawsuit requests damages exceeding $75,000 and a jury trial.
Now, $75,000 might seem low for a celebrity lawsuit. But that number is strategic. It keeps the case in a faster civil court track and signals a floor, not a ceiling—meaning settlement negotiations could go higher.
The complaint seeks compensatory damages for:
- Reputational harm
- Emotional distress
- Humiliation
- Impact on his family
It also seeks punitive damages, which are designed to punish especially harmful conduct and deter others from similar behavior.
The Bigger Privacy Question: Can You Talk About Your Ex’s Body?
This lawsuit sits at the cutting edge of a genuinely new legal question: In the age of podcasts, livestreams, and influencer culture, what can you say about an ex-spouse’s body?
Traditionally, people shared relationship stories with friends over coffee. Now, “sharing with friends” means broadcasting to millions of followers who generate ad revenue with every click.
Haley’s attorney argues this is just a woman speaking truthfully about her own relationship experience—protected speech under the First Amendment.
Matt’s attorneys counter that when you monetize intimate details about another person’s body without consent, you’ve crossed from personal storytelling into commercial exploitation.
Courts haven’t fully settled this yet, which is why this case could set significant legal precedent.
What Happened to Their “Amicable” Divorce?
Here’s the part that makes this whole thing extra messy: by all accounts, their 2022 divorce was friendly.
Haley filed for divorce in May 2022, citing “irreconcilable differences”—the most vanilla divorce reason possible. In a January 2024 YouTube video, she described their split as mature and drama-free.
“Because my ex and I were so young we had absolutely no idea what being married was like,” she explained in that video. “Eventually years later we decided to just stay friends so we ended up getting a divorce.”
She emphasized they continued hanging out during and after the divorce because “at the end of the day we are friends.”
So what changed between “we’re totally cool” in January 2024 and “two Coke cans” in November 2025?
The lawsuit doesn’t speculate, but the timing is notable. Matt remarried in 2024 and welcomed a son. Maybe seeing her ex move on triggered something. Maybe the livestream culture encouraged oversharing. Maybe she genuinely thought it was funny and harmless.
Whatever the reason, Matt clearly doesn’t find it amusing.
What Happens Next?
Haley’s legal team has announced they’ll file a motion to dismiss, which means the case could be over before it really begins if a judge agrees the lawsuit has no legal merit.
If the case survives dismissal, we’re looking at discovery (where both sides exchange evidence), possible settlement negotiations, and potentially a jury trial.
The whole thing could drag on for months or even years.
For Matt, the goal seems clear: Stop the circulation of these comments, get compensation for the harm, and send a message that you can’t profit from someone’s most private details.
For Haley, the strategy appears to be framing this as protected speech—a woman sharing her own relationship experience, not maliciously invading someone’s privacy.
What This Means for Influencers and Exes
If Matt wins, it could establish new boundaries around what influencers can share about ex-partners, especially when that content is monetized.
It would signal that viral engagement and truth aren’t defenses when you’re revealing intimate physical details about another person without consent.
If Haley wins, it reinforces broad First Amendment protections for public figures discussing their own experiences, even when those experiences involve another person’s body.
Either way, this case is a wake-up call: In 2026, casual conversations on livestreams can become legal evidence. What feels like harmless storytelling to one person can be experienced as public humiliation by another.
And when millions of dollars in influencer income are at stake, those casual conversations aren’t really casual anymore.
Key Takeaways:
- Matt Kalil sued his ex-wife Haley Kalil for invasion of privacy and unjust enrichment after she compared his penis size to “two Coke cans” on a viral Twitch livestream
- The lawsuit alleges she disclosed “highly intimate and private facts” and profited from the attention while his family endured harassment
- He’s seeking damages exceeding $75,000 and a jury trial
- Haley’s attorney plans to immediately move to dismiss the case, calling it “legally unsupported” and raising First Amendment concerns
- The case could set important precedent about privacy rights vs. free speech for public figures discussing ex-spouses
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
About the Author
Sarah Klein, JD, is a licensed attorney and legal content strategist with over 12 years of experience across civil, criminal, family, and regulatory law. At All About Lawyer, she covers a wide range of legal topics — from high-profile lawsuits and courtroom stories to state traffic laws and everyday legal questions — all with a focus on accuracy, clarity, and public understanding.
Her writing blends real legal insight with plain-English explanations, helping readers stay informed and legally aware.
Read more about Sarah