Legal analysts across the political spectrum are weighing the merits of President-elect Donald Trump’s lawsuit against the Des Moines Register, with many expressing skepticism about its future success. Filed on December 16, the lawsuit targets not only the Register but also its parent company, Gannett, and polling expert Ann Selzer, centering around allegations of election interference steeped in claims of consumer fraud.
The crux of Trump’s complaint lies with the Register’s published poll from early November, which suggested Trump was trailing Vice President Kamala Harris by three points just days before the Iowa election. This poll contradicts Trump’s resounding win of the state by 13 points. The lawsuit alleges the poll constituted fraudulent activity intended to influence the election, prompting Trump to assert, “it was fraud and it was election interference.”
Legal experts, including Samantha Barbas, a First Amendment scholar at the University of Iowa, believe Trump’s interpretation of Iowa law is stretched. “Iowa’s consumer fraud law is a poor fit for Trump’s complaint,” said Barbas, noting its original intent is to protect consumers of goods and services, not those receiving news information. “This is completely far-fetched,” she added.
The lawsuit raises interesting questions about how consumer protection laws could be applied to the media. Bill Brauch, former director of the Iowa Attorney General's Consumer Protection Division, echoed Barbas's skepticism, stating, “I have never heard of anyone being sued in the media for publishing a story.” He questioned how media reports could even be classified as “merchandise” within the parameters set by Iowa law.
Legal precedent also leans heavily toward protecting media entities. Eugene Volokh, a law professor at UCLA, acknowledged the formidable barriers posed by the First Amendment, which typically safeguards news coverage, especially about public figures. Instances of court actions against media organizations related to misleading or false political speech have faced significant challenges, underscoring how difficult it is to prove “actual malice” under current laws.
The lawsuit against the Des Moines Register exemplifies Trump's broader strategy against media outlets, where he has historically challenged coverage he views as unfavorable. Barbas noted this growing trend could induce a chilling effect, stifling aggressive reporting. “There’s serious concern...that the erosion of legal protections could lead to less aggressive news coverage,” she cautioned, linking this concern to recent settlements like the one ABC News reached with Trump over their reporting.
Many legal experts agree the ramifications of such lawsuits could be more damaging than successful outcomes. Nicholas A. Klinefeldt, attorney for the Des Moines Register, stated, “The Iowa Consumer Fraud Act was intended to protect Iowa consumers and not to become a vehicle to intimidate the press. We have full confidence Trump will fail.”
Despite the mounting legal challenges, Trump's camp continues to assert the merit of their claims, vowing to pursue accountability from the media for what they characterize as brazen misinformation. Such lawsuits may not only shape Trump's strategy toward the media but also set precedents influencing media conduct and political reporting in the era of heightened scrutiny and criticism of journalistic practices.
With the lawsuit now pending before the Iowa federal court, its outcome remains uncertain. What is clear, though, is the potential for this case to challenge established legal norms governing political polling and media reporting. With both sides preparing for legal sparring, the coming months may reveal much about the relationship between political figures and the media, particularly how allegations of fraud and misinformation could redefine accountability in high-stakes political environments.
