Judge Dismisses GOP Consultant’s Libel Suit

Republican strategist Don Sipple’s libel lawsuit against Mother Jones magazine was dismissed Wednesday after a Los Angeles Superior Court judge ruled that a story detailing spousal abuse allegations against Sipple was based on public court records.

Sipple, the political consultant who injected family values and character as issues in the past two GOP presidential campaigns, had sought $12.5 million in damages from the San Francisco-based alternative publication.

Instead, the magazine now may force him to pick up its legal tab for defending itself, under a law intended to discourage groundless lawsuits that chill free speech.

Mother Jones reported on spousal abuse allegations by two of Sipple’s former wives who testified in a 1992 child custody case that Sipple won. Sipple denied the abuse allegations in his suit, and contended that the story was published as part of a plot “to reduce or extinguish altogether [his] influence in the Republican Party and to shut him out of campaigns of major significance.”

But Superior Court Judge Ernest M. Hiroshige ruled that Sipple was a public figure and did not prove that the magazine had acted with malice.

“Many of the statements are privileged because they are gleaned from the court proceedings,” Hiroshige wrote in an opinion accompanying his ruling. “The few remaining statements fill in the details of the abusive behavior. However, they do not really contain any new information.”

Sipple’s attorney, Gary Bostwick, said there is “a high likelihood” of an appeal. He added that the judge’s ruling does not prove the Mother Jones story is true.

Mother Jones Editor Jeffrey Klein said he stands by the story. “When somebody’s bullying and you’ve got the facts, it gets my back up,” he said. “I love stories when the bully goes one step too far.”