Iowa Judge Dismisses Trump Des Moines Register Lawsuit

• An Iowa judge dismissed a consumer fraud lawsuit filed by Donald Trump and others against the Des Moines Register and pollster J. Ann Selzer.
• The lawsuit alleged fraud over a pre-election poll that showed Trump losing in Iowa, despite his eventual 16-point victory in the state.
• Polk County District Judge Scott Beattie ruled that the Des Moines Register is protected by the First Amendment and the fraud claims also failed under the Iowa Consumer Fraud Act.
• The court cited the *New York Times Co. v. Sullivan* precedent, emphasizing that state law cannot be used to sanction speech, regardless of whether the parties are private.
• Legal experts and the defendants praised the ruling as a significant victory for press freedom and a rejection of attempts to use "fake news" claims to stifle media.

Judge Beattie emphasized that the legal action attempted to expand both Iowa's statutory and common law beyond their established boundaries, effectively trying to transform speech enjoying the highest level of First Amendment protection into a basis for liability.

A state court in Iowa recently dismissed a lawsuit brought by former President Donald Trump, U.S. Representative Mariannette Miller-Meeks, and former Iowa State Senator Brad Zaun against the Des Moines Register and pollster J. Ann Selzer. The plaintiffs had alleged consumer fraud, contending that a poll published by Selzer three days before the November 5 presidential election, which indicated Trump would lose in Iowa, was misleading. Despite the poll's projection, Trump ultimately secured a victory in the state by a significant 16-point margin.

Polk County District Judge Scott Beattie issued the ruling on Wednesday, granting the defendants' requests for dismissal. The lawsuit, which centered on claims related to a Trump consumer fraud Iowa poll, sought to hold the media outlet and its pollster accountable for the pre-election survey. This decision by the Iowa judge dismisses Trump Des Moines Register lawsuit, marking a significant outcome in a case that drew national attention.

In his comprehensive 64-page ruling, Polk County District Judge Scott Beattie determined that the Des Moines Register is entitled to robust First Amendment protection against the allegations made by the plaintiffs. The court found that the consumer fraud claims, even if considered independently of constitutional safeguards, would still fail under the provisions of the Iowa Consumer Fraud Act. Judge Beattie emphasized that the legal action attempted to expand both Iowa's statutory and common law beyond their established boundaries, effectively trying to transform speech enjoying the highest level of First Amendment protection into a basis for liability.

The judge underscored the court's impartial role, noting that while such a case involving prominent political figures and an election might invite political interpretations, the judiciary's function is strictly to apply the law without bias. He explicitly rejected the plaintiffs' argument that the First Amendment was inapplicable because both parties were private entities. Citing the seminal 1964 U.S. Supreme Court decision in *New York Times Co. v. Sullivan*, Judge Beattie clarified that the identity of the party seeking to sanction speech is irrelevant; what matters is whether state law, through a court's judgment, would be used to restrict it. This precedent establishes that what a state cannot achieve through criminal statutes, it also cannot accomplish through civil law, as the threat of damage awards can be an even more potent inhibitor of speech. The ruling reinforces the high bar for media liability political speech Iowa.

The dismissal of the lawsuit has been widely lauded by advocates for press freedom and the defendants involved. Polly Grunfeld Sack, chief legal counsel for USA Today, which owns the Des Moines Register, characterized the ruling as a triumph for the First Amendment and the vital role of a free press in American democracy. She expressed satisfaction that the court recognized the true nature of the "meritless lawsuit," suggesting that "fake news" claims often serve as attempts to penalize news organizations for coverage disliked by those in power.

Robert Corn-Revere, who served as chief counsel for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression and led the defense for pollster J. Ann Selzer, also praised the decision. He asserted that the lawsuit was "laughable from the beginning" and should never have been initiated. Corn-Revere highlighted that the First Amendment prohibits any government entity, including the president, from punishing individuals under the guise of "fake news," clarifying that while it might function as a campaign slogan, it holds no legal standing. This outcome strongly affirms the Des Moines Register First Amendment protection and the broader principle that media organizations are shielded when reporting on political matters, making it exceptionally difficult to pursue consumer fraud or similar claims against them.

This ruling reinforces the robust First Amendment protections for media organizations and pollsters in the US, particularly concerning political speech, making it exceptionally difficult to pursue consumer fraud or similar claims against them. Lawyers advising clients on potential litigation against news outlets or pollsters in Iowa should be aware of this high bar and the strong precedent set by *New York Times Co. v. Sullivan*.

Source: Original reporting via Courthouse News Service