Iowa newspaper subscriber gets last gasp at lawsuit over 2024 Trump poll

A Des Moines Register subscriber pointed to the newspaper’s own description of the poll as “stunning, shocking, surprising” as proof the paper probably doubted its accuracy.(CN) — An Iowa man asked an Eighth Circuit panel to resurrect his consumer fraud lawsuit against the Des Moines Register and its pollster over the newspaper’s 2024 poll showing President Donald Trump losing Iowa to Kamala Harris by three points, days before Trump ended up winning by more than 13 points.Dennis Donnelly filed a class action claiming he and other Register subscribers were defrauded by the newspaper and its pollster J. Ann Selzer with what he called an intentionally deceptive poll. In November 2025, a federal judge dismissed the case on First Amendment grounds because the defendants are shielded by the actual malice standard established by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1964 New York Times v. Sullivan decision.A separate but identical claim brought by Trump against the Register and Selzer is pending in Iowa state court.At oral arguments Tuesday in St. Louis, Daniel R. Suhr, a Center for American Rights attorney representing Donnelly, framed the central question of the case as whether there’s a reasonable inference that the Register and its pollster acted knowingly or recklessly in publishing a poll that was 16 points off from the actual election result.“There is a 1 in 3.5 million chance that the poll was an honest mistake,” Suhr said. “It seems like running with something that has that likelihood of being erroneous would raise a significant, reasonable inference of subjective doubt.”“At the time, Dr. Selzer and the Des Moines Register described the poll as ‘stunning, shocking, surprising.’ Often when we use those words in our everyday lives, when something is shocking to us, sometimes our response is, ‘Gee, I wonder if it’s true.’ So when the Des Moines Register itself described the poll this way … there was a reasonable inference that they had subjective doubt about it and they decided to run it anyway.”Robert Corn-Revere, representing Selzer from the Foundation for Individual Rights, told the panel the lower court was right to call the plaintiff’s theory of liability absurd and dismiss all claims with prejudice.“The plaintiff’s argument, essentially, is that any subscriber can sue a publication if they become frustrated in believing that their news product is inaccurate,” Corn-Revere said. “Just imagine how broad a theory this is. It means that subscribers to Fox News can sue if they believe that the product isn’t fair and balanced. Or the New York Times subscriber could sue the newspaper if it becomes convinced that the Times doesn’t in fact print all the news that’s fit to print. The law doesn’t permit such claims.”Donnelly initially filed suit in state court, raising claims of fraudulent or recklessly negligent misrepresentation, consumer fraud, professional malpractice and interference with the right to vote. The Register removed the case to federal court, which denied Donnelly’s motion to remand the case to state court and dismissed it. Donnelly also appealed the lower court’s denial of his motion to remand the case to state court.The Register denies all of Donnelly’s claims and says the lower court correctly dismissed the case, in part on the First Amendment protection afforded to media defendants under the Times v. Sullivan actual malice standard.“Donnelly cannot overcome the First Amendment’s protection for The Register’s news reporting on a paramount matter of public interest — the 2024 presidential and congressional elections — under the guise of protecting consumers by misapplying the Iowa Consumer Fraud Act (‘ICFA’) and Iowa’s common law,” the newspaper says in its brief.The federal appeals panel featured Chief U.S. Circuit Judge Steven Colloton and U.S. Circuit Judge Lavenski R. Smith — both George W. Bush appointees — along with U.S. Circuit Judge Justin D. Smith, a Donald Trump appointee.Colloton, who lives in Des Moines and subscribed to the Des Moines Register Sunday edition online, said in a statement posted on the Eighth Circuit docket that while the lower court has not certified the class action he nonetheless opted out of any class and concluded he is not required to disqualify himself in the case.The panel did not say when a decision would be issued.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads