Trump Discovers One Weird Trick To Turn SLAPP Suits Into Consumer Fraud Claims

And this dingus is going to go from courthouse to courthouse trying to make it happen.

Screenshot via Rumble

Donald Trump has discovered one weird trick to get around that pesky First Amendment. What if speech is actually merchandise? All you have to do is wrap it in a box labeled “stuff” or “services” or “election interference,” and then you can say “This stuff is defective! You defrauded me! I demand eleventy billion dollars!”

That is literally what Trump did in two recent media lawsuits, as well as one filed last year against journalist Bob Woodward. The Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act claim was mooted when the Woodward got his case transferred to New York. But Trump is still vowing to punish journalists with expensive SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) complaints, and clearly he thinks state consumer fraud laws are an excellent vehicle to do it.

Poll Taxes

On Tuesday, Trump sued pollster J. Anne Selzer, who wrongly predicted a narrow Harris victory in Iowa. Trump won the state by 13 points, and now he’s accusing Selzer and the Des Moines Register, which published the poll, of violating the Iowa Consumer Fraud Act. In his telling, an incorrect poll “creates a narrative of inevitability for Democrat candidates, increases enthusiasm among Democrats, compels Republicans to divert campaign time and money to areas in which they are ahead, and deceives the public into believing that Democrat candidates are performing better than they really are.” And somehow, this is just like when the car salesman upsells you on that Tru-Cote that doesn’t do anything.

The suit is horseshit — even if Selzer had falsified her poll results and leaked them in an effort to interfere in the election, it wouldn’t be fraud as against Trump. (The Des Moines Register, who paid for it, would probably have a case.) But Trump’s complaint hardly even tries to match the alleged harms to the language of the statute.

Despite filing in his personal capacity, Trump claims damages on behalf of his campaign, as well as “other Republicans” and “consumers within Iowa who paid for subscriptions to the Des Moines Register or who otherwise purchased the publication.” He insists that Selzer’s result was “so implausible that no objective pollster could have honestly advanced it,” then claims that he totally bought it, howling that “consumers, including Plaintiff, were badly deceived and misled as to the actual position of the respective candidates in the Iowa Presidential race.” But most gallingly, he characterizes the Des Moines Register’s journalism as “merchandise” under Iowa Code § 714.16, which defines the term as including “objects, wares, goods, commodities, intangibles, securities, bonds, debentures, stocks, real estate or services.”

Defendants furnished “merchandise” to consumers within the broad meaning of the statute since they provided a service: physical newspapers, online newspapers, and other content that contained the Harris Poll.

Newspapers aren’t a service — they are speech! And you can’t get around the protections of New York Times v. Sullivan by crossing out “defamation” and writing “consumer fraud” in your allegations.

Texas Tort Tantrum

Trump’s lawyer in the Iowa and Texas cases is Edward Paltzik, a conservative blowhard who recently represented “PharmaBro” Martin Shkreli. Ironically, his bio says he focuses his practice on the First Amendment. In Texas, Paltzik is joined by Daniel Epstein, the lawyer who threatened to sue the Justice Department over the “illegal” Mar-a-Lago raid.