An Iowa judge dismissed Donald Trump’s late-2024 lawsuit against the Des Moines Register and pollster J. Ann Selzer, concluding that the claims would improperly penalize speech protected by the First Amendment. Judge Scott Beattie said the petition sought to stretch Iowa law in a way that would make highly protected speech a liability. The suit challenged a November 2, 2024 poll showing Kamala Harris leading Trump by three points. The ruling drew praise from the free-speech group FIRE and comes amid separate court scrutiny of Trump’s White House bans of several news outlets.
Iowa Judge Dismisses Trump Lawsuit Against Des Moines Register And Pollster, Citing First Amendment
US President Donald Trump waves as Chinese President Xi Jinping arrives at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland, US, September 23, 2026. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst
An Iowa judge on Wednesday dismissed former President Donald Trump's late-2024 lawsuit against the Des Moines Register and pollster J. Ann Selzer, finding that First Amendment protections shielded the newspaper and pollster from claims tied to a survey that showed Trump trailing ahead of the 2024 election.
"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,"
Iowa District Judge Scott Beattie wrote in the ruling that the petition attempted to expand Iowa law in ways that would penalize speech entitled to the strongest constitutional protection.
Trump, who has frequently clashed with news organizations both in and out of court, went on to win the 2024 presidential election. The suit challenged a poll published on November 2, 2024, that indicated Democratic nominee Kamala Harris led Trump in Iowa by three percentage points — a result the former president publicly criticized.
The dismissal in the Register case came as a separate judge signaled during a hearing that Trump’s decision to bar CNN, MSNBC and Politico from the White House appeared to conflict with prior federal appellate court rulings.
FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression), which represented Selzer, welcomed the decision. FIRE Chief Counsel Bob Corn-Revere said in a statement:
"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."
The ruling underscores continuing tensions between Trump and the media: he has urged broadcasters to drop programs he dislikes, asked the Federal Communications Commission to revoke licenses of outlets he disfavors, filed multiple lawsuits against news organizations and barred some outlets from White House access.
The decision reaffirms strong judicial protection for poll reporting and press commentary under the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment.
Reporting by Kanishka Singh in Washington; editing by Donna Bryson and Chris Reese.
Help us improve.
