Iowans will decide this November whether to allow three Iowa Court of Appeals judges and 85 trial court judges to remain on the bench. Since our state adopted the current judicial selection system in 1962, each judge must periodically go on the ballot—every eight years for Iowa Supreme Court justices, every six years for those serving on other courts. (None of the seven Iowa Supreme Court justices is up for retention this year.)

Iowa voters have retained almost all judges over the past six decades. But any jurist who receives more “no” than “yes” votes in November—as happened with three Iowa Supreme Court justices in 2010—will be out of a job. The next governor would fill any vacancies in early 2027, after receiving a list of finalists from the State Judicial Nominating Commission (for the Iowa Court of Appeals) or its district-level counterpart (for District Court judges).

While some people routinely approve or reject every judge as a matter of principle, voters who want to make informed choices often find it difficult to learn anything about the judges listed on the back of the ballot.

This post highlights the appellate and district court judges who received the highest and lowest ratings in the Iowa State Bar Association’s 2026 Judicial Performance Review, the main public source of information about Iowa’s judges.

President Donald Trump has attacked press freedom in many ways, using private litigation as well as the powers of his office. While some corporations settled meritless lawsuits to curry favor with the administration, the Des Moines Register, its parent company, and its former pollster fought back.

They were vindicated this week, when a Polk County District Court dismissed Trump’s lawsuit against Ann Selzer, her polling company, the Des Moines Register, and the Gannett Corporation. Trump, U.S. Representative Mariannette Miller-Meeks, and former State Senator Brad Zaun claimed the final Iowa Poll before the 2024 election constituted consumer fraud. That poll indicated that Democratic candidate Kamala Harris led the presidential race in Iowa by 3 points. Days later, Trump carried the state by a 13-point margin.

Robert Corn-Revere, who argued on Selzer’s behalf as chief counsel for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, said during a January court hearing that in 40 years of practicing First Amendment law, he’s never seen a more frivolous lawsuit than this one.

Over more than 60 pages, District Court Judge Scott Beattie comprehensively rejected the plaintiffs’ arguments and dismissed the case with prejudice, meaning it cannot be refiled. The judge wrote that the lawsuit “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. After considering the parties’ arguments, the Court must conclude that the protection is too great and the reach is too far.”

It’s worth walking through the key points, since a spokesperson for Trump told some media the president “will take his powerful case to the Iowa Supreme Court […].” I doubt he’ll have better luck there.

U.S. Senate candidate Abby Finkenauer avoided disaster when the Iowa Supreme Court unanimously ruled on April 15 that she should appear on the Democratic primary ballot.

But the five justices who joined the majority opinion signaled they weren’t pleased by how Finkenauer criticized the District Court judge who had reached the opposite conclusion.

A Polk County District Court has handed a big win to Republicans seeking to knock Abby Finkenauer off the Democratic primary ballot for U.S. Senate.

Judge Scott Beattie ruled on April 10 that the State Objection Panel used the wrong legal standard when it counted signatures with missing or incorrect dates. Consequently, the court found, Finkenauer’s campaign “has failed to submit at least 100 signatures from at least 19 counties” as required by Iowa law.