An Iowa judge has thrown out President Trump’s lawsuit against pollster J. Ann Selzer and The Des Moines Register over polling numbers they published just days before the 2024 general election.
In a ruling Wednesday, Iowa District Court Judge Scott J. Beattie rejected Trump’s claims that the poll violated state consumer fraud laws. The survey had shown former Vice President Kamala Harris leading Trump in the Hawkeye State by 3 percentage points.
The poll missed the mark by a wide margin. Trump went on to win Iowa by 14 points. Even so, the judge determined that the inaccurate prediction did not amount to fraud.
“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 his 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 judge added.
The legal fight has taken several turns since it began. Trump first filed the lawsuit in state court in December 2024. The case was moved to federal court in February 2025, and the president subsequently dropped it.
That summer, Trump refiled a nearly identical complaint in Polk County, Iowa. His legal team argued that the poll data was “deceptive” and that it violated state laws covering fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation.
Wednesday’s ruling marks a decisive end to that effort. Beattie dismissed Trump’s complaint with prejudice, meaning the president cannot bring the case again.
Selzer praised the decision in a statement released Wednesday, defending her work and the role of pollsters.
“Polling is a social science, not clairvoyance, and no responsible pollster can guarantee an election outcome,” Selzer said.
“What we can guarantee is that we will follow the data wherever it leads, even when the results are uncomfortable or unexpected,” she continued. “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.”
At the heart of the case was a question of whether a published poll that turns out to be wrong can expose a pollster and a newspaper to liability under consumer fraud laws. Trump’s lawyers argued that it could, pointing to state laws on misrepresentation. Beattie disagreed, finding that the speech at issue falls under the highest category of First Amendment protection and that the president’s claims reached too far.
The ruling brings to a close a legal battle that stretched from state court to federal court and back again, spanning well over a year after the president first went to court over the poll.
Trump’s attorneys did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Hill on the decision.
[READ MORE: Judge Limits Trump’s Control Over White House Press Access, Orders Three Outlets Reinstated]
