Kaylah Walton
In a notable update in the ongoing legal conflict involving Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni, Baldoni has rescinded a subpoena that was directed at Taylor Swift.
This development represents the latest chapter in a high-profile situation that merges Hollywood intrigue with real-world courtroom drama.
Taylor Swift removed from the Lively vs. Baldoni spectacle
The subpoena aimed to obtain materials from Swift and her legal representatives regarding the film It Ends With Us, but was met with immediate pushback from both Swift’s and Lively’s legal teams.
A representative for Lively confirmed on May 22 that Baldoni’s legal representatives had officially retracted their request, expressing satisfaction with the outcome and condemning the initial attempt as an effort to entangle Swift in an unrelated legal dispute.
“We supported Taylor’s team in their successful effort to quash these unwarranted subpoenas aimed at her legal advisors,” the representative stated.
“We will continue to advocate for any external parties unjustly targeted or threatened during this process.”
Lively’s team has accused Baldoni and his production firm, Wayfarer, of trying to leverage Swift’s fame for media visibility.
“From the beginning, the Baldoni and Wayfarer groups have attempted to center Taylor Swift in this legal matter,” a spokesperson for Lively remarked.
“Confronted with the need to justify their actions in federal court, they backed down.”
Swift, who granted permission for her song “My Tears Ricochet” to be included in the It Ends With Us soundtrack, has consistently stated that she played no direct role in the film’s creation.
“Taylor Swift never visited the set… did not contribute to the film’s score… and did not view It Ends With Us until weeks following its premiere,” her representative previously clarified, characterizing the subpoena as an attempt “to generate public intrigue by crafting tabloid sensationalism.”
This legal skirmish, initiated by Lively’s December 2024 complaint alleging sexual misconduct and retaliation from Baldoni, has evolved into a more intricate affair.
Accusations have traded back and forth, including a recently dismissed assertion by Baldoni’s lawyers claiming Lively threatened to release private messages with Swift, a statement that Judge Lewis J. Liman labeled as “improper” and irrelevant.
Even though the subpoena has been withdrawn, Swift’s connection to the case, both personally and via court documentation, indicates that her name may continue to arise as the proceedings move toward a March 2026 trial date.
