Court dismisses with prejudice, citing First Amendment protection

An Iowa state court judge on Wednesday dismissed with prejudice President Donald Trump’s lawsuit against pollster J. Ann Selzer and the Des Moines Register, ruling that the case sought to convert First Amendment-protected speech into liability. The suit also named Selzer’s polling firm, Selzer & Company, and Gannett, the Des Moines Register’s parent company, as defendants.

Iowa District Court Judge Scott J. Beattie wrote that the plaintiffs’ petition sought to stretch Iowa statutory and common law beyond their current bounds, according to the ruling text reported by The Hill and The New York Times.

“At its core, the Plaintiffs’ Petition seeks to stretch both Iowa statutory and common law beyond their current bounds, turning speech that enjoys the highest category of First Amendment protection into a liability,” Beattie wrote in the ruling. “After considering the parties’ arguments, the Court must conclude that the protection is too great and the reach is too far. The case must therefore be dismissed.”

The lawsuit alleged that the Selzer poll, which showed then-Vice President Kamala Harris leading Trump by 3 percentage points in Iowa days before the November 2024 election, amounted to “brazen election interference” and violated the Iowa Consumer Fraud Act. Trump went on to win the state by 14 points.

Bob Corn-Revere, a lawyer for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, which is representing Selzer, said the court recognized what the defense had maintained throughout the litigation.

“We’re pleased that the court recognized what we’ve said all along: This lawsuit was laughable from the beginning and never should have been brought,” Corn-Revere told The New York Times. “The First Amendment does not allow anyone in government, least of all the president, to punish people under the banner of ‘fake news.’”

Selzer welcomed the ruling in a statement provided to The Hill.

“Polling is a social science, not clairvoyance, and no responsible pollster can guarantee an election outcome,” she said. “What we can guarantee is that we will follow the data wherever it leads, even when the results are uncomfortable or unexpected. I am grateful that Judge Beattie’s ruling recognizes these principles and reaffirms the fundamental freedom to pursue and publish the truth without political interference.”

Trump’s legal team did not immediately respond to the ruling.