Why Trump’s Lawsuit Against CBS Is Clearly Ridiculous

In the final weeks of the 2024 presidential election, no issue has concerned Donald Trump more than his obsession with CBS’s 60 Minutes.

Briefly resumeVice President Kamala Harris was interviewed on a news program in early October; some of her answers were edited for the sake of time (standard practice in television journalism), and the Republican former president has pretended this was some kind of scandal almost every day since.

Trump has among other thingscalled for CBS to lose its broadcast license, asked that 60 Minutes be taken off the air, called the show and the network a “threat to democracy,” and called the supposed scandal “the biggest scandal in broadcasting history.” and even characterized the non-story as “completely illegal“

There is a explained patiently that the claims were unfounded and that the editing process was routine and fair. However, Trump’s lawyers recently wrote to CBS News: threatened lawsuit. Apparently they weren’t joking. Reuters reports this.:

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump sued CBS on Thursday over an interview with his Democratic rival Kamala Harris that aired on the news program “60 Minutes” in early October that alleged the lawsuit was misleading, according to court materials. The complaint, filed in federal court in the Northern District of Texas, alleges that the channel aired two different answers from Harris to a question about the war between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip.

The Republican candidate is demanding – I kid you not – $10 billion in damages.

“Former President Trump’s repeated statements against 60 Minutes are false,” a CBS News spokesperson said. “The lawsuit Trump filed today against CBS is completely without merit, and we will vigorously defend against it.”

From a legal perspective, the idea that CBS News engaged in “election interference” is difficult to take seriously. Recently, the former president wrote on his online platform that he has “EVIDENCE” to substantiate his strange claims, but to date he has not shared such evidence.

Politically, the Harris campaign has spent a lot of time and energy trying to convince voters that Trump is overly focused not on solving problems but on revenge and retribution. The Republican, who switched his attention to CBS in the final days of the race, appears to be strengthening the Democratic Party’s position: Trump has a list of enemies, and Harris has a list of to-dos.

But what I like most about this story is the fact that the lawsuit was filed in federal court in the Northern District of Texas. Why, pray tell, did the former president’s lawyers file the case there? I’m glad you asked.

CBS is not located in Texas. Trump doesn’t live in Texas. Trump’s campaign headquarters is not located in Texas. The 60 Minutes interview with Harris did not take place in Texas. Nothing in this story has anything to do with Texas.

But the Republican’s lawyers filed the case there anyway, and The Washington Post prepared a report this helped explain the reason: “The lawsuit was filed in the Northern District of Texas courthouse, where Matthew J. Kaczmarik, Trump’s nominee, is the sole judge.”

To be sure That official explanation The basis for the lawsuit in the Northern District of Texas is that the “60 Minutes” interview was broadcast by a CBS affiliate in the area, where it was allegedly seen by some Texans.

But there’s no point in playing games here. Trump’s lawyers wanted to take the case to a controversial Trump-appointed judge, who quickly become a lawyer for GOP plaintiffs I’m looking for a legitimate ally on the bench.

This, for example, was taken upon by Kaczmarik. suspend FDA approval of mifepristone last year, largely based on very dubious research – which have since been withdrawn. (Eventually the solution was canceled due to procedural reasons.)

When a federal judge blocked the Biden administration from enforcing a new rule in Texas requiring firearms dealers to do background checks on buyers at gun shows. it was Kaczmariktoo much.

When a conservative group wanted to challenge energy efficiency standards, they decided it would be a good idea to bring a case. in the Kaczmarik area. When a conservative group wanted to challenge the administration’s protections for LGBTQ+ students, they did the same.

It’s as if Trump’s lawyers have decided to offer the legal and political world yet another example of why reforms are needed to reduce judicial selection.