Reply #37: I can assure you that Gannon will never bring any such claim

[atre]

For one, it would give the defendants the court's power, discovery, to compel disclosure of even more embarassing facts from his sordid past.

Second, he doesn't even have a cognizable claim of which I am aware. Defamation won't work because he's a public figure, thereby invoking the NYT v. Sullivan actual malice standard. Actual malice actually doesn't relate to intent, as it would seem; rather, it means knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard of truth or falsity. In this case, that certainly wouldn't work since IT'S ALL TRUE. Most states have invasion of privacy torts, although the specific types recognize vary significantly from state to state. The one most closely approaching the type of claim he would need is "public disclosure of private facts," and there's at least one fatal obstacle to such a claim: just like defamation, the tort of disclosure is subject to serious constitutional restraints, not the least of which is that no one can be penalized for publishing information that is public.