Florida prosecutors dropped a misdemeanor battery charge Thursday against Republican front-runner Donald Trump’s campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, but the reporter he grabbed last month still could win a defamation lawsuit against Trump and his handsy aide, experts say.

Journalist Michelle Fields said Wednesday – when the elected state attorney’s decision was first reported – that she is considering filing a defamation lawsuit in response to aggressive pushback from Trump and Lewandowski after the March 8 incident.

Courts would consider Fields a public figure, experts say, requiring her to show the men made false statements with actual malice to win a defamation lawsuit. That higher burden requires a showing that the men knew statements were false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth.

Both Lewandowski and the blustery billionaire initially suggested the journalist was lying about being forcefully grabbed after asking the candidate a question at an event.

"[Y]ou are totally delusional. I never touched you,” Lewandowski said in an untruthful tweet. Though a photo displayed bruising on Fields’ arm, the candidate said “perhaps she made the story up. I think that's what happened.”

Fields was vindicated when local police released surveillance footage from the Trump-owned property that showed Lewandowski grabbing her. Trump refused to fire Lewandowski and instead alleged Fields had changed her story, another apparent untruth.

“I feel frustrated just talking about this,” University of Miami law professor Donald Jones says. "We all know what’s going on, but the First Amendment is going to require a great deal of proof to reach the result that seems so obvious."

Jones says the First Amendment shield for speaking falsehoods about public figures is intended to protect activists and others who misspeak and that proof required for public figures to win a defamation lawsuit “is a pretty heavy burden,” though possible for someone like Fields to meet.

Lewandowski’s tweet, he says, “is very difficult to defend – if I were the judge I would not throw [a defamation lawsuit] out on summary judgment” – an action defense lawyers certainly would seek to prevent a jury from considering the case.

But Jones says Trump likely would hire the best lawyers, who perhaps could put the tweet and other statements in a context that makes them appear not to be knowingly or recklessly false.

“It will be hard to reach Donald Trump,” he adds, addressing the candidate’s claim Fields changed her story. “He will have people to fall on their swords and say, ‘This is the information we supplied him.’”

Cornell University Law School professor Jeffrey Rachlinski agrees Fields would face an uphill battle if she files a defamation lawsuit but says he sees a potential path forward if a lawsuit were to survive a defense motion for summary judgment.

“The most plausible claims are for statements made about events that the parties had direct involvement with,” he says. “That is, Lewandowski's claim that he never touched her is the most likely to have been made with actual malice. “

But, he says, Trump probably would be shielded from liability for saying Fields “perhaps” lied about being grabbed, or that she changed her story.

“Even if Mr. Trump's statements that Fields changed her story are inaccurate, he also could claim he was misremembering – although of course he has often indicated that he has an excellent memory – or that he had heard different accounts,” Rachlinski says. “She has to prove that he actually knew what he was saying is false, which will be difficult."

It’s possible, he adds, that Lewandowski could try a similar poor-memory defense about the grab itself.

If there's evidence Trump saw the footage from his hotel showing the grab before suggesting Fields was lying, or “if he had the video in his hand, knew that it would show him the truth, and believed he might be wrong, then that would be recklessness,” Rachlinkski says. But without that, the most he arguably is guilty of is negligence toward the truth, which would not make him guilty of defamation.

UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh says the fate of a lawsuit would depend on a careful analysis of allegedly defamatory statements and also where Fields lives, as he says the law of that state would likely be applied to the case, regardless of where the contested comments were made.

“In principle,” Volokh says, “if you know someone is telling the truth but call her a liar, with regard to a specific allegation, that may well be actionable defamation,” a point recently addressed by a federal court in a case brought by three women who say Bill Cosby sexually assaulted them.

Pace University School of Law professor Leslie Garfield says it’s possible for Fields to win a large award if she can show any financial harm, even if her national profile was enhanced by the controversy. A jury award would feature actual damages plus punitive damages.

Fields, a frequent contributor on Fox News, left her job at Breitbart News as Lewandowski’s grab shook the ranks of the generally Trump-friendly news outlet, prompting several other staffers to jump ship.

Garfield, like other experts, says Fields’ status as a public figure makes a defamation lawsuit more difficult but says the sustained attack by Trump and Lewandowski on Fields’ credibility could cut against the men in a courtroom, with innuendo also possible to be considered defamation.

“Trump saying she changed her story is even more offensive [than Lewandowski's false denial of the grab], because through innuendo ... that suggests she, in fact, is a liar,” Garfield says. “The most troubling statement to me that would make it through to a jury is Trump saying she changed her story. … That sounds like a statement that person is a liar.”

Garfield says Fields’ account will have to be flawlessly consistent for her to have a shot at the billionaire vying for the presidency.

"I think there is a chance she could win," Garfield says, provided she's able to show some financial damages or that her professional reputation has been sullied by false allegations of deceit.

“The more vicious and the greater the vitriol, the more likely a jury is going to find malice,” she says.

Fields did not respond to a request for comment on the status of her plans. After Fields told The Blaze she is considering a lawsuit, however, Fox News host and former trial attorney Greta Van Susteren wrote on her blog: "she is just not going to win and it will be expensive and a heartache. Anyone encouraging this young woman to bring a lawsuit is irresponsible to her.” Fields responded on Twitter, “I think I'll pass on getting legal advice from a Trump shill.”

Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks pointed to a statement about the elected prosecutor’s decision not to press forward with the battery charge against Lewandowski, without commenting directly on a possible defamation case. It's unclear if Trump would be willing to reach a settlement to prevent a lawsuit.