Trump Loses Two More -- and Does It Matter?

Susan Estrich on Sep 26, 2026

This week, President Donald Trump lost twice in his war against a free press. Will it stop him? Almost certainly not.

The first solid loss came on Wednesday, in a suit

Trump has brought twice against the Des Moines Register and its pollster. Their crime? Predicting that he would lose when he went on to win.

Days before the November election, the Des Moines Register (a much-respected newspaper) published a poll which showed Kamala Harris leading Trump by three percentage points. As it turned out, Trump carried Iowa by 14 points.

So the poll was wrong. Many of them are. Lucky Trump.

That's the way most politicians would see it. But not Trump. Cross his path and he's out for punishment.

Trump sued, claiming that the paper and its pollster, J. Ann Selzer, had violated the state's consumer fraud law. The suit was originally brought in state court, was removed to federal court; then Trump dropped it and refiled in state court a day before a new law went into effect which would make him liable for attorneys' fees if he lost. Which, of course, he did -- after years of litigation.

On Wednesday, Iowa District Court Judge Scott J. Beattie dismissed the suit with prejudice, meaning Trump can't file it yet again. The court was clear: Trump was trying to subvert the First Amendment:

"At its core, the Plaintiffs' Petition seeks to stretch both Iowa statutory and common law beyond their current bounds, turning speech that enjoys the highest category of First Amendment protection into a liability," Beattie ruled. "After considering the parties' arguments, the Court must conclude that the protection is too great and the reach is too far. The case must therefore be dismissed." (emphasis added)

In a statement, pollster Selzer applauded the ruling, saying, "Polling is a social science, not clairvoyance, and no responsible pollster can guarantee an election outcome. What we can guarantee is that we will follow the data wherever it leads, even when the results are uncomfortable or unexpected. I am grateful that Judge Beattie's ruling recognizes these principles and reaffirms the fundamental freedom to pursue and publish the truth without political interference."

Without political interference? Not so fast. Political speech, and its protection, lies at the core of the First Amendment. Trump has made it his target. He punishes those who publish negative stories about him, and even if he ultimately loses, it stings. And chills.

Later -- in the early morning hours on Thursday -- Judge Timothy Kelly, a federal judge in Washington (a Trump appointee whom he has since castigated), ordered the Trump administration to temporarily reinstate CNN, MS NOW and Politico's access to the White House after they were banned from the White House by Trump without, the judge found, "constitutionally adequate due process."

The ruling meant journalists should have been able to return to work at the White House complex immediately, but this White House doesn't work that way. Some staffers from all three outlets were initially refused entry. An emergency hearing was requested. The reporters were finally granted entry, but the litigation continues.

What is especially troubling about this latest round of the litigation is Trump's belated invocation of national security as the justification for what was clearly a politically motivated ban:

"For one thing, nothing in the record that predates this suit suggests that the revocation of Plaintiffs' hard passes was motivated by national security concerns," Kelly wrote. "Certainly, that is not what President Trump said when he announced that he was 'banning' Plaintiffs from the White House -- instead, he focused on the alleged lack of truthfulness and negativity of Plaintiffs' reporting."

"And even the justifications provided to Plaintiffs after this case was filed are ambiguous about the true purpose of the revocations: while Defendants' letters to Plaintiffs mention national security concerns, they purport to identify reporting that 'threatened national security and/or spread falsehoods,' leaving open the possibility that all the stories fall into the latter bucket, rather than the former."

None of this will stop Trump. Next time, he will just focus on national security. Hopefully, judges will continue to see through the Trump falsehoods. Our democracy depends on it.

========

To find out more about Susan Estrich and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.