Content creator Lauren Neidigh, known online as LethalLauren904, has requested a protective order against actress Blake Lively, accusing her of using subpoena intimidation tactics in an ongoing legal dispute. The conflict arises from Lively’s subpoenas directed at Google and social media platform X to obtain personal information during her lawsuit involving Justin Baldoni.
Although the subpoena against Neidigh was recently dropped, she addressed the court on July 28, stressing the chilling effect such legal measures have on creators like herself. She maintains that Lively’s legal team has failed to provide any justification for the relevance of her banking records to the case.
Allegations of Intimidation and Harassment by Legal Tactics
Neidigh criticized the subpoenas for targeting online creators who voiced negative opinions about Lively, stating these legal requests lack evidentiary backing and aim to intimidate. She expressed concern that the subpoena was part of a broader strategy to suppress free speech and invade privacy of individuals uninvolved in the litigation.
Even though the subpoena was dropped, Neidigh emphasized that it could be reissued, which she argues imposes an ongoing and unfair burden on her. She argues,
“[Lively’s] Subpoena targeted creators who have expressed unfavorable opinions about her online. The Subpoena was not supported by any evidence. It served to intimidate, harass, chill constitutionally protected free speech, and threaten the safety and privacy of non-parties who are not involved in this litigation,” —Lauren Neidigh, Content Creator
She further added,
“an undue burden on [her] and [served] to harass and intimidate [her] for her lawful expression of her unfavorable opinions of [Lively] online,” —Lauren Neidigh, Content Creator
Due to these ongoing threats, Neidigh has sought an order to prevent Lively from issuing any additional subpoenas aimed at her personal data and has requested sanctions against such actions.
Context of the Subpoenas and Responses from Both Parties
The subpoenas, which also targeted other creators such as Kassidy O’Connell, demanded access to account details including banking information. Those affected have pushed back, insisting that Lively has no legitimate basis to collect their private information.
A representative for Blake Lively responded that the subpoenas do not imply any wrongdoing but are part of gathering admissible evidence for the federal court proceedings. The spokesperson said,
“There is no silencing of content creators, they are obviously making their views known. This is a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit against Justin Baldoni and a number of other Wayfarer defendants and we are simply seeking information to aid in our fact gathering,” —Blake Lively’s Representative
Meanwhile, the dispute between Lively and Baldoni centers on accusations of sexual harassment and subsequent retaliation. Baldoni denies the allegations, claiming that after production on their film wrapped, Lively took control of promotional activities and excluded him.
Accusations of a Coordinated Campaign and Ongoing Legal Battle
The tension has escalated with public claims from Lively’s representatives accusing Baldoni’s team of planning a covert media campaign to discredit her and conceal the harassment claims. The representative explained the subpoenas are part of uncovering evidence within this wider effort, stating,
“Remember [Baldoni’s crisis PR rep’s] own words: to shield Justin Baldoni from the possibility that Blake Lively might publicly reveal he sexually harassed her and others, [Baldoni’s rep] planned an ‘untraceable’ media campaign designed to ‘bury’ Ms. Lively,” —Blake Lively’s Representative
and further added,
“The subpoenas to social media companies are one piece of the puzzle to connect the evidentiary dots of a campaign that was designed to leave no fingerprints.” —Blake Lively’s Representative
While Lively has dropped subpoenas targeting Neidigh, O’Connell, and a third creator, she continues seeking information from other creators who have commented on the lawsuit. The gathering of evidence remains ongoing ahead of the trial slated for March 9, 2026, which will include Lively’s deposition within the next few weeks.
Impact on Creators and Legal Proceedings Ahead
The legal dispute highlights growing tensions between public figures and online commentators, especially regarding how subpoenas can be used to access private data and potentially suppress criticism. Neidigh and others fear the subpoenas contribute to an environment of intimidation and harassment, affecting their ability to freely express their views online.
The case will likely set significant precedents affecting the relationship between social media creators and high-profile litigation. As the trial date approaches, the extent of discovery requests and protective measures will remain closely watched by creators and legal observers alike.
