Weather 
A judge on Wednesday dismissed President Trump’s lawsuit accusing The Des Moines Register and its former pollster of misrepresenting the state of the 2024 presidential race, rejecting the president’s claim that the newspaper’s poll coverage violated Iowa’s consumer fraud law.
Calling the case extraordinary, Iowa District Judge Scott J. Beattie said that allowing the lawsuit and its “faulty” claims to proceed could have a chilling effect that “can discourage others from reporting on and debating public affairs.” He sided with pollster J. Ann Selzer and the newspaper, who described the lawsuit as a conspiracy theory and an affront to free speech protections.
The ruling Wednesday came hours after a judge heard arguments but did not rule from the bench in a case on Mr. Trump’s ban of CNN, MS NOW and Politico from White House grounds. Mr. Trump banned the three outlets beginning Friday, assailing what he called “fake news.”
Mr. Trump filed the lawsuit against Selzer, The Des Moines Register and the newspaper’s parent company in December 2024, accusing them of fraudulently publishing inaccurate poll results to damage him and help Democrats, saying coverage of polls is not protected speech.
Mr. Trump and his team have filed several lawsuits against media organizations accusing them of bias, calling into question the boundaries of free speech protections, particularly for press. Some of those lawsuits have ended in settlements.
In dismissing the case in Iowa state court, Beattie wrote that Mr. Trump’s suit sought 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.” After hearing the arguments, the judge concluded the constitutional protection “is too great and the reach is too far. The case must therefore be dismissed.”
Beattie said the case would have to be dismissed even if, solely for the purpose of deciding the motions, he accepted Mr. Trump team’s allegations that the poll was intentionally skewed and its results fabricated. “Even with this assumption, each of the three counts still fails,” the judge wrote, because the lawsuit did not meet the legal requirements for fraud or consumer deception. He made clear that the poll and coverage of it are constitutionally protected political speech and not a commercial product.
The White House referred questions to the president’s personal lawyers, who did not immediately respond to messages.
Selzer’s case was taken up by the free speech advocacy group Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. She said Wednesday she was grateful for the ruling, which “reaffirms the fundamental freedom to pursue and publish the truth without political interference.”
“Polling is a social science, not clairvoyance, and no responsible pollster can guarantee an election outcome,” Selzer said in a statement.
Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks and former Iowa state Sen. Brad Zaun, both Republicans, joined the lawsuit. Selzer and her co-defendants wanted the case moved to federal court but, after a year of legal proceedings, the first hearing took place this year in state court.
The poll, conducted by Selzer’s company in the final days of October and released just days before Election Day 2024, showed then-Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democrats’ presidential nominee, capturing 47% of Iowa likely voters, to Mr. Trump’s 44%.
Mr. Trump ultimately won the support of 56% of the nearly 2 million Iowans who voted.
Mr. Trump, Miller-Meeks and Zaun alleged the misleading coverage diminished their reputations, valuable time in the final days of the campaign, and campaign funds and resources.
