Sandra Fluke needs to sue LardAss for every penny he has...

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

18. That was a different situation. Sipple didn't sue for slander

but for invasion of privacy. The elements of the two torts are entirely different - since Sipple was already in the news his sexual orientation was part of the story, and therefore the the court held the newspapers hadn't invaded his privacy. The idea of a "public figure" is limited to the tort of defamation because First Amendment issues are in play - someone who has become a public figure either in general, by voluntarily becoming a politician or a celebrity, or for limited purposes, such as, e.g., testifying before Congress, is not precluded from suing but only has the greater burden of proving that the publisher of the defamatory statement acted with actual malice (knowing the statement was false or making it in willful disregard of the truth). This is to protect media outlets from the consequences of criticizing public figures, while still requiring them to avoid outright lying. But it doesn't apply to invasion of privacy cases. The statements made about Stipple were not actually false, so defamation principles wouldn't apply.