The president-elect of the United States, Donald Trump, has initiated a lawsuit against the Des Moines Register, one of the most influential newspapers in Iowa, according to recently revealed court documents. The lawsuit was filed on the evening of Monday, December 16, after Trump intensified his legal threats against the media and publicly stated that he would also consider suing influencers and other public figures for defamation. This legal action, which is sparking widespread debate about press freedom and the boundaries of legal threats, focuses on an opinion poll conducted by the newspaper in partnership with renowned pollster J. Ann Selzer, which indicated strong support for Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential candidate.
The poll, released on November 2, 2024, showed Harris leading Trump by 13 percentage points in Iowa, a key battleground state that could determine the future of the presidential race. For Trump, this poll was not merely a sampling error or a common discrepancy in electoral surveys but a deliberate act of result manipulation. In the lawsuit, Trump asserts that the “error” in the poll was not an unforeseen coincidence but an intentional act aimed at interfering in the electoral process and influencing the votes of thousands of voters. The document claims that Trump believes pollster J. Ann Selzer knew exactly what she was doing when publishing the results in a way that allegedly favored the Democratic candidate.
The lawsuit seeks to hold the Des Moines Register and its parent company, Gannett, accountable for what Trump describes as blatant “electoral interference.” Trump and his lawyers are requesting a court order to prevent the newspaper from continuing what they deem “deceptive and fraudulent practices” in its electoral polling, arguing that such actions not only harm his campaign but also undermine the integrity of the electoral process. However, the Des Moines Register and its representatives deny the allegations, asserting that all published polls and reports adhere to strict journalistic standards of impartiality and accuracy. They also defend the credibility of pollster J. Ann Selzer, who is highly respected in the U.S. opinion polling industry.
The role of Gannett, as the parent company of the Des Moines Register, is also central to this case. In response to Trump’s lawsuit, a Gannett spokesperson stated that the company “stands by its reporting and believes the lawsuit has no merit.” The newspaper’s defense emphasizes that the poll was conducted with full transparency and that the results accurately reflected voter opinions in Iowa, showcasing a possible electoral trend at the time of data collection.
Trump, on the other hand, did not limit his accusations to the Des Moines Register. In a series of public statements made on Monday, the president-elect was emphatic in claiming that he considers the poll an attempt at electoral fraud and interference in the democratic process. He declared, “In my opinion, it was fraud and electoral interference,” directly referring to the poll that showed Kamala Harris leading in Iowa. Trump also highlighted the impact such polls could have on his voter base, particularly during a critical phase of the campaign when every percentage point of support is crucial for success at the polls. “It costs a lot of money to do this, but we need to straighten out the press,” Trump told reporters, emphasizing that his administration would take measures to address what he perceives as media errors or manipulations.
This lawsuit against the Des Moines Register is part of a series of legal actions Trump has been taking against media outlets, which he frequently accuses of promoting false and distorted information about him and his administration. Legal experts, however, have raised serious concerns about the impact of such lawsuits, not only on reporting about the current administration but also on press freedom as a whole. Roy Gutterman, a communications professor at Syracuse University, expressed concern that legal threats and lawsuits against the media could lead to more cautious and less aggressive journalism, fearing legal or financial retaliation. “There are serious concerns that the erosion of legal protections could lead to less aggressive news coverage,” Gutterman said, pointing out how the high cost of legal action could discourage the media from investigating or reporting public interest issues with the same depth.
An example of this dynamic can be seen in a recent case involving ABC News. On December 14, the television network agreed to donate $15 million to Trump’s presidential library to resolve a lawsuit involving statements made by anchor George Stephanopoulos. Stephanopoulos had referred to the lawsuit filed against Trump by E. Jean Carroll, a writer who accused the former president of sexual assault. The settlement was seen as an attempt to avoid the cost and risks associated with a prolonged lawsuit, which, for many experts, could set a dangerous precedent where news organizations might yield to financial or legal pressures to avoid litigation.
Furthermore, Trump also mentioned his lawsuit against CBS News, related to an interview with Kamala Harris aired on the 60 Minutes program in October 2024. The lawsuit, which seeks $1 billion in damages, alleges that CBS edited the interview in a misleading way, distorting Harris’s words and creating a narrative harmful to her candidacy. CBS, however, has challenged the allegations, stating that the lawsuit is “completely without merit” and requesting that a judge dismiss it. Trump, on the other hand, has continued to claim that media coverage, including the 60 Minutes interview, amounts to “fraud and electoral interference,” reflecting his growing frustration with how the media has handled his campaign and administration.
These legal actions against media outlets, whether related to electoral polls or specific reports, have sparked significant debate about the limits of free speech and the media’s role in a polarized political environment. Trump’s litigation threats and legal actions are not just a matter of personal or political defense but raise fundamental questions about the power of the press and the mechanisms that ensure transparency and accountability in the electoral process. With the new administration about to begin, the implications of these legal battles could have a lasting impact on how the media covers Trump’s presidency and, more broadly, on how journalists and news organizations interact with political figures in an increasingly hostile and censored environment.
The lawsuit filed by Donald Trump against the Des Moines Register and his growing campaign of litigation against various media outlets mark a critical point in the relationship between political power and the press in the United States. The allegations of “fraud” and “electoral interference” in polls and reports, while contested by journalists and experts, reflect a clear attempt by Trump to control the narrative and challenge information he considers detrimental to his image and campaign. These actions not only raise questions about freedom of speech and legal protections for the press but also highlight the potential impact of such lawsuits on media behavior, which might feel discouraged from adopting a more critical or investigative stance for fear of legal retaliation.
Moreover, these lawsuits shed light on a growing phenomenon of politicization in media coverage, where public figures and politicians seek to use the judicial system as a tool to silence criticism or influence public perception. The risk of an erosion of legal protections for journalists could result in less aggressive and more cautious coverage, which would weaken the press’s vital role in holding power accountable and informing the public.
As Trump’s administration approaches, the outcome of these legal battles will have repercussions not only on domestic politics but also on how American society understands press freedom. Ultimately, these judicial battles illustrate the fragility of state-media relations in times of growing political polarization, where the press’s role as a democratic pillar may be tested in unprecedented ways. The resolution of these cases, whether in favor of or against media outlets, will have a lasting impact on the journalistic landscape and, consequently, on the health of American democracy.
