In an unexpected turn, President Donald Trump has now reportedly discharged his lawsuit against Iowa pollster Ann Selzer and the Des Moines Register, dropping the case without any settlement or apology to the defendants.
The lawsuit, initially filed in December, alleged that Selzer’s pre-election poll showing Vice President Kamala Harris ahead of Trump in Iowa constituted “fraud” and illegally interfered with the election.
Selzer, a veteran pollster whose final survey forecasted a narrow Harris lead, was publicly chastised by Trump in a Mar-a-Lago press conference.
He claimed the poll amounted to “election interference” under Iowa’s Consumer Fraud Act.
That poll had stood in stark contrast to Trump’s eventual double-digit win in the state. Nonetheless, Selzer had released detailed methodological data and acknowledged that it was “the biggest miss” of her decades-long career.
Her legal defenders, including the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), argued the lawsuit was a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation—a SLAPP—intended to chill political speech protected by the First Amendment.
They maintained that publishing a poll, even one that proved inaccurate, cannot legally constitute fraud or interference.
In a motion to dismiss filed in February, Selzer’s legal team described the suit as “fatally flawed on every level,” urging the court to reject it outright. They also underscored the lack of a viable legal foundation for punishing a poll that simply forecasted an electoral outcome inaccurately.
Despite continuing his media attacks on Selzer and the Register, Trump quietly dropped the lawsuit this week.
NPR’s investigative team confirmed that no financial settlement was reached—Selzer walked away without apology or concession, and Trump absorbed his own legal costs.
The move effectively ends the legal collision that once claimed to target poll inaccuracy but had appeared to many as a publicity gambit.
The dismissal highlights a larger trend of political figures using civil suits to challenge unfavorable media coverage.
Legal experts caution that even unsuccessful lawsuits can intimidate reporters and analysts, prompting some outlets to shy away from rigorous reporting out of fear of costly litigation.
For Selzer, who publicly retired from polling shortly after the controversy, the dismissal brings closure. She regained her professional standing and dodged what could have been a prolonged and draining legal battle.
The case also reaffirms longstanding legal protections for journalistic work and political reporting—even when outcomes are incorrect or politically inconvenient.
[READ MORE: Trump Blasts Democrat Senator Over Claim He May Make Obamaesque Deal With Iran]
