Orange man not a fan of free speech

> FIRE’s defense of pollster J. Ann Selzer against Donald Trump’s lawsuit is First Amendment 101

https://www.thefire.org/news/fires-defense-pollster-j-ann-selzer-against-donald-trumps-lawsuit-first-amendment-101

QUOTE

It is hard to imagine a legal claim that violates basic First Amendment principles more thoroughly than does President-elect Donald Trump’s lawsuit against veteran Iowa pollster J. Ann Selzer and The Des Moines Register. 

His civil lawsuit arises from a poll published before the November 2024 election that predicted Vice President Kamala Harris in the lead in Iowa. It seeks damages and a court order to prevent the newspaper from publishing any future “deceptive polls” that might “poison the electorate.”  

Trying to punish newspapers for supposedly “false” reports is not a new phenomenon. Backlash to the Sedition Act of 1798, in which Congress criminalized “false” criticism of some politicians, laid the foundation of First Amendment doctrine. This lawsuit is just a new name for the same theory long rejected under the First Amendment.

Trump’s lawsuit, brought under an Iowa law against “consumer fraud,” violates long-standing constitutional principles. It’s also entirely meritless under the Iowa law. 

Enlisting the courts to settle political grudges is directly at odds with the First Amendment’s protection for political speech.

The lawsuit is the very definition of a “SLAPP” suit — a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. Such tactical claims are filed purely for the purpose of imposing punishing litigation costs on perceived opponents, not because they have any merit or stand any chance of success. In other words, the lawsuit is the punishment. And it’s part of a worrying trend of activists and officials using consumer fraud lawsuits to target political speech they don’t like. 

FIRE opposes SLAPP suits and is representing Selzer in order to vindicate her — and your — First Amendment rights.