Blake Lively's Subpoena Saga: A Creator's Fight for Privacy and Protection

Blake Lively's Scorched Earth Policy: A Celeb's Desperate Bid for Revenge

In a shocking turn of events, Blake Lively's private information subpoena crusade has taken an intriguing twist. Despite withdrawing her subpoenas against three independent content creators, Lauren Neidigh, McKenzie Folks, and Kassidy O'Connell, the embattled actress is still facing a barrage of criticism for her aggressive tactics.

At the center of the storm is Neidigh, aka LethalLauren904, who has been a vocal critic of Lively's online. In a letter to the judge, obtained by The Scholarly Note, Neidigh expressed concerns that Lively could reinstate the subpoena at any moment, leaving her facing an "ongoing threat" of further invasive discovery requests.

Neidigh alleged that Lively's legal team had been "largely unresponsive" to her attempts to communicate with them and failed to provide a clear explanation for why her bank details were relevant to the actress's lawsuit against Justin Baldoni. Neidigh claimed that Lively's team was attempting to intimidate and harass small creators like herself, who have expressed unfavorable opinions about her online.

The drama began when Lively issued subpoenas to Google and X (formerly Twitter) in connection with her ongoing legal battle against Baldoni, her former It Ends With Us co-star and director. The actress accused Baldoni of sexual harassment and retaliation, claims he vehemently denies.

In a bizarre twist, Lively's team sent a letter to the court stating that they had withdrawn the subpoenas as there was "no further information required" from the content creators in question. However, the move has done little to quell the controversy surrounding Lively's actions.

Meanwhile, Kassidy O'Connell, who represented herself as a "Jane Doe," expressed concerns about the wholesale nature of the subpoena process, which she claimed targeted 43 content creators in bulk. In a letter dated July 27, obtained by The Scholarly Note, O'Connell urged the judge not to approve Lively's motion to deny the Third-Parties' Motions to Quash as moot.

Lively's spokesperson has maintained that the actress is seeking information to aid in her fact-gathering efforts and that the subpoenas are not an attempt to silence content creators. However, critics argue that the move is a clear attempt to intimidate and harass individuals who have expressed opposing views online.

As the drama unfolds, it remains to be seen whether Lively's aggressive tactics will pay off or backfire in the long run. With the case set to proceed to trial on March 9, 2026, both sides will finally get their day in court.

A Timeline of the Drama

• Blake Lively issues subpoenas to Google and X (formerly Twitter) targeting over a dozen journalists and small creators.
• Lively's team sends a letter to the court stating that they had withdrawn the subpoenas as there was "no further information required" from the content creators in question.
• Lauren Neidigh, McKenzie Folks, and Kassidy O'Connell express concerns about the subpoenas and the potential for future harassment.
• The case is set to proceed to trial on March 9, 2026.

The Backstory

Lively's lawsuit against Baldoni stems from allegations of sexual harassment and retaliation. However, Baldoni has vehemently denied these claims, sparking a heated online debate about the merits of Lively's accusations.

As the drama continues to unfold, it remains to be seen how this saga will play out in the courtroom. Will Lively's aggressive tactics pay off or backfire? Only time will tell.

Sources:

• The Scholarly Note
• Variety