Telegram is where we really talk. Don't miss out!
In court filings, CBS attorneys argued that Donald Trump’s lawsuit accusing the network of violating Texas consumer protection laws was improper, noting that the law does not apply to a media outlet’s editorial decisions. They also pointed out that Trump failed to justify “how he arrived at $10 billion in purported damages” or include his campaign as a plaintiff, rendering the suit “irrelevant.”
“Whether viewed through the lens of standing, statutory construction, or the First Amendment, President Trump’s claim does not withstand scrutiny,” CBS’s attorneys wrote.
The lawsuit stems from an October 5 60 Minutes interview with Vice President Kamala Harris, broadcast weeks before the 2024 presidential election. CBS aired two separate portions of Harris’s response to a question about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on different programs, sparking backlash from Trump and his supporters.
“Her REAL ANSWER WAS CRAZY, OR DUMB, so they actually REPLACED it with another answer in order to save her or, at least, make her look better,” Trump wrote at the time. “A FAKE NEWS SCAM, which is totally illegal. TAKE AWAY THE CBS LICENSE.”
When Trump filed the lawsuit, CBS News responded with a statement rejecting the claims, clarifying that it had aired two different segments of Harris’s response without altering her remarks.
“The interview was not doctored; and 60 Minutes did not hide any part of Vice President Kamala Harris’s answer to the question at issue,” the network said.
Trump’s attorneys, Edward Paltzik and Dan Epstein, filed the complaint in the Amarillo Division of the Northern District of Texas, where a Trump-appointed judge would preside over the case. This led to accusations of “judge-shopping.” CBS’s attorneys also challenged the venue, noting that CBS’s witnesses and evidence are based in New York while Trump resides in Florida.
In their complaint, Trump’s attorneys accused CBS and other media organizations of working to “get Kamala elected,” writing, “Even with aid from the Fourth Estate, Kamala’s campaign has been unable to conceal embarrassing weaknesses, including her habit of uttering ‘word salad.’”
A CBS lawyer defended the editing of Harris’s interview, stating that it was done for time purposes and not “doctored.” “Editing is a necessity for all broadcasters,” the lawyer said. Trump’s attorneys dismissed this justification.
“This alleged innocent refrain is contradicted both by the facts of this malicious doctoring of news and by years of CBS’s journalistic animosity toward President Trump and previous Republican presidential candidates,” they wrote.
