BREAKING: Trump Drops Lawsuit Against Iowa Pollster Ann Selzer
Source: Mediaite
BREAKING: Trump Drops Lawsuit Against Iowa Pollster Ann Selzer
SARAH RUMPF JUN 30, 2025 3:43 PM
President Donald Trump has dropped his lawsuit against Iowa pollster Ann Selzer and the Des Moines Register, which he filed in response to a poll she conducted that was published by the paper right before the November election.
The poll in question showed Vice President Kamala Harris leading Trump 47% to 44% among likely Iowa voters -- a shocking result that made headlines across the country. Unsurprisingly, Trump was enraged at the poll, and neither winning the election (including a double-digit victory in Iowa) nor Selzer's retirement did much to soothe his ruffled feathers. Later that month, Trump called for Selzer and the newspaper to be investigated and then followed that up with a lawsuit in December.
In the complaint, Trump's attorneys attempted to frame the case as a consumer fraud issue, arguing that Selzer's poll constituted "fake news" and was an act of "brazen election interference," that was an "unfair act or practice" under Iowa's consumer fraud law "because the publication and release of the Harris Poll 'caused substantial, unavoidable injury to consumers that was not outweighed by any consumer or competitive benefits which the practice produced.'" ... The complaint was later amended to add a member of Congress who won her re-election, Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R-IA), and a state senator who lost, Bradley Zaun.
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression {"FIRE"}, a nonpartisan free speech advocacy nonprofit, announced in January that it would represent Selzer pro bono, and issued a statement blasting Trump's lawsuit for being "about as unconstitutional as it gets." Selzer's legal team includes FIRE attorneys Robert Corn-Revere as lead counsel along with Conor Fitzpatrick, Greg Greubel, and Adam Steinbaugh, plus Matthew McGuire of the Des Moines law firm Nyemaster Goode as additional local counsel.
A motion to dismiss filed on Selzer's behalf in February cited extensive case precedent on why the lawsuit overall was an attempt to undermine both the letter and intent of the First Amendment and delivered a scathing point-by-point takedown of how each element of the legal claims the plaintiffs are attempting to bring are "fatally flawed on every level" and nothing more than "a transparent attempt to punish news coverage and analysis of a political campaign."
{snip}
Read more: https://www.mediaite.com/politics/trump/breaking-trump-drops-lawsuit-against-iowa-pollster-ann-selzer/amp/
Mediate is not what Ithinkif as a good source, but even the Des Moines Register doesn't have the story yet on its website.
Hat tip, Kyle Cheney
Trump drops lawsuit against the Des Moines Register and Ann Selzer over her late-campaign poll showing Kamala Harris in play in Iowa. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney.bsky.social) 2025-06-30T19:09:48.796Z
Kyle Cheney
@kyledcheney.bsky.social
Follow
Trump drops lawsuit against the Des Moines Register and Ann Selzer over her late-campaign poll showing Kamala Harris in play in Iowa.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.iasd.89411/gov.uscourts.iasd.89411.71.0.pdf
June 30, 2025 at 3:09 PM

Irish_Dem
(72,529 posts)This pollster could tell us how Trump cheated to get installed into the WH.
She is the gold standard of Iowa polls.
reACTIONary
(6,575 posts)Irish_Dem
(72,529 posts)Her research design and methodology looked good.
She predicted a major shift in Iowa.
JI7
(92,341 posts)lostnfound
(17,092 posts)adjusted to match the official results. Back in my youth, they DID match the official results, and they were performed in every state. Which changed around 2000.
Now their public purpose isnt to confirm the results or expose anomalies; they are only used to make sure that identity politics is amplified and to point out Democratic failures like Lucy with the football.
mahatmakanejeeves
(65,713 posts)
Irish_Dem
(72,529 posts)We can get very accurate results via polling with fairly small sample sizes.
The fact Trump went after her right away with vengeance tells me she had the goods on Trump.
He had to destroy her.
reACTIONary
(6,575 posts)Jose Garcia
(3,250 posts)0rganism
(25,249 posts)It's not Stelzer's fault, nor her organization, not even the data itself. It's the nature of the beast -- done correctly, there's a high chance a randomly-sampled poll result is within the margin of error, but it's never 100%. There's always a very small chance you collected data showing a truly wacky result. The simplest explanation is that Stelzer's poll was an unfortunate outlier of that sort. It happens.
As this is part of the mathematics upon which polling itself is based, it's also an iron-clad defense against the kind of allegations levied by F47's flock of legal vultures, which may be why they dropped their case.
angryxyouth
(276 posts)There is a case now which has been in the news about trying to get a hand recount in Rockland NY because of anomalies found in the tabulation . https://smartelections.us/2024-election-update
This is a report on the Pennsylvania election from world renowned political scientist and election analyst expert Dr Walter R Mebane a professor at the University of Michigan. This report is on his U Mich website.
https://websites.umich.edu/~wmebane/PA2024.pdf
There are also anomalies found in Iowa, North Carolina, Nevada and other. The information is coming out slowly as lawsuits are being filed to allow full hand recounts.
See electiontruthalliance.org I know its a terrible name but the analysis they are doing is amazing. They use all data points which dont discriminate against parties. Its math. They also have a YouTube channel and are on substack. All of the data is reviewable and peer reviewed.
Irish_Dem
(72,529 posts)But she fought back and that means she would show her data in open court.
I saw her speak in the weeks leading up to the election and was impressed
with her research design and methodology.
Once researchers see the data and polling specifics the truth will be out there for
all to see.
I also believe her data will show how Trump cheated, how he manipulated the votes,
and exactly where and what he did.
angryxyouth
(276 posts)It is all going to come out. Some of the people doing the analysis are saying there appears to consistency between how the data looks on graphs through all the states they have now analyzed. It also seems consistent with elections and other countries. The graphs seemed the show what they are calling a Russian tail because its consistent with the graphs first seen in Russian elections. The graph should look like a standard Bell curve, but they dont they peak at the end among other things.
Irish_Dem
(72,529 posts)The tools are amazing.
The research designs and analysis are so sophisticated that older PhDs like myself
are not even sure what we are looking at!
I am sure they can start comparing prior data with the Trump data
and the differences and oddities will pop out.
If the data looks like Russia election data, and we are seeing very
odd low probability configuration, we are then putting together the crime scene data.
angryxyouth
(276 posts)What you think about the information in the links that I provided. On the electiontruthalliance facebook site they walk you through the many types of graphs.
?si=xZeE_jbQDBoid5a7This link is the face of ETA on the MarkTompson podcast on youtube. If you skip to 12:10 time it takes you rite to the technical stuff.
Irish_Dem
(72,529 posts)reACTIONary
(6,575 posts).... How would a binary decision, basically a coin toss, show up as a "normal distribution"? I would think the graph would be two straight lines, one for trump, one for Haris. Maybe a blip for a libertarian or a green.
Do you have a link to these charts? I'm curious as to what they are graphing.
elleng
(140,194 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(57,199 posts)Midnight Writer
(24,370 posts)This Administration has made it a standard practice to use the legal system to harass anyone who publicly disagrees with them.
It is past time that the Administration faces consequences for harassing people.
MLWR
(416 posts)He never should have filed it in the first place. I bet he was having trouble coming up with the way he was damaged by it.
obamanut2012
(28,652 posts)bluestarone
(19,961 posts)
onenote
(45,467 posts)First, chances are the case would never get to discovery because the motion to dismiss would be granted. He punted not because he was afraid of discovery but because he thought he had a better chance of winning if the case was heard in state court, which is where he originally filed Indeed, he was still trying to get the case back to state court as recently as last month. When that effort was crushed by the federal judge hearing the case, he opted to dismiss -- without prejudice -- the federal action.
He may have a plan in mind where he can re-file in state court in a way that won't get bounced back to fedrtal court. Will it work? I don't think so and hope not, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if this isn't the end of his efforts.
reACTIONary
(6,575 posts)BeyondGeography
(40,549 posts)I hope she is living well and happily.
LetMyPeopleVote
(166,532 posts)onenote
(45,467 posts)Why would Selzer pay to settle a suit that can be re-filed? She wouldn't.
Botany
(74,790 posts)Trump cheated. End of story.
onenote
(45,467 posts)Why did he make every effort possible to keep the suit alive in state court? It would be subject to discovery, if it went to trial, whether it was in state court or federal court.
Botany
(74,790 posts)
S. O. P. Standard Operating Procedure.
He is now suing the City of Los Angeles for being Los Angeles.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/132151636
onenote
(45,467 posts)See post #12.
sinkingfeeling
(55,945 posts)onenote
(45,467 posts)LetMyPeopleVote
(166,532 posts)Link to tweet
Yesterday, Trump moved to dismiss the case in federal court and re-filed essentially the same suit in state court. (The original suit also started in state court and was moved to federal court.)
Now, the Register argues the dismissal was improper, and an attempt to evade possible penalties under Iowa's new anti-SLAPP law.

LetMyPeopleVote
(166,532 posts)trump was losing in federal court and had tried earlier to move the case back to state court. This dismissal and refiling smells
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/07/01/trump-iowa-lawsuit-poll-state-court/
Attorneys for the newspaper sought to block the dismissal of the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa Central Division. They argued that Trump and his co-plaintiffs Bradley Zaun, a Republican former Iowa state senator, and federal Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R) had previously sought to have the case remanded to a state court and were refused. An appeal of this decision was still active, they added in a motion filed Monday......
Trumps legal team wrote in a filing to the Iowa Southern District Court that, Plaintiffs President Donald J. Trump, Representative Mariannette Miller-Meeks, and Former State Senator Bradley Zaun, give notice of their dismissal of this action without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(1)(A)(i).
Trumps legal team refiled the lawsuit against Selzer and the Des Moines Register in the Iowa state court for Polk County, according to court documents.
Bob Corn-Revere, chief counsel of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, which is providing legal representation for Selzers defense, told The Washington Post that it was aware of the voluntary dismissal in federal court. There is no settlement in the case, he added. We are reviewing next steps as we continue to defend J. Ann Selzers First Amendment rights.
In a later statement, FIRE said on social media that the attempt to change jurisdiction was procedural gamesmanship and a transparent attempt to avoid federal court review of the presidents transparently frivolous claims.
0rganism
(25,249 posts)Delicious
LetMyPeopleVote
(166,532 posts)The federal court judge rejected trump's attempt to dismiss and refile
Link to tweet
This order made me smile
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.iasd.89411/gov.uscourts.iasd.89411.78.0.pdf