CBS Calls Donald Trump’s ‘60 Minutes’ Lawsuit A “Meritless” Attempt To “Evade Bedrock First Amendment Principles” In Latest Filing

As settlement talks continue between the legal teams of Paramount Global and Donald Trump, CBS once again characterized the president’s lawsuit against the network as “meritless” and an attempt to “evade bedrock First Amendment principles.”

The comments came in the network’s filing Monday in a Texas federal court, where Trump and a co-plaintiff, Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-TX), are urging a judge not to toss out the president’s $20 billion lawsuit over the way the network edited an October interview with Kamala Harris.

Read the CBS response to Trump’s 60 Minutes lawsuit.

Trump has claimed that the interview edits were deceptive, designed to boost Harris’ electoral chances. But after he won the election, Trump revised the lawsuit to claim that it violated the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act and the federal Lanham Act, and that he was harmed because 60 Minutes captured traffic that otherwise would have done to his own media properties. The state and federal laws are typically used in false advertising claims.

In a filing last month in which it claimed 60 Minutes was commercial speech, Trump’s legal team argued that CBS, in its previous legal filings, “neglects to reckon with modern forms of advertising monetization; the consumers’ attention is the product which content creators vie for, which they can then monetize with advertisements.”

In the CBS filing, the network’s legal team argued that the 60 Minutes broadcast, as well as a preview that aired on Face the Nation, were editorially protected speech. Trump’s legal team has claimed that they are commercial speech given that the network promoted the Harris interview.

Trump’s legal team, CBS noted, provided “this Court with nothing that would support the conclusion that the Face the Nation and 60 Minutes Broadcasts — involving an interview of a presidential candidate about issues of utmost public concern — are anything but fully protected editorial speech, and they cite not a single case holding that news broadcasts (or promotions for such broadcasts) are commercial speech. Indeed, the Supreme Court has repeatedly rejected that argument. The First Amendment applies fully to the news reporting at issue and bars Plaintiffs’ claims.”

“The law is clear that news organizations may have a ‘profit motive,’ but such motive in no way divests their reporting of First Amendment protections,” CBS’ legal team wrote. The chilling effect of Plaintiffs’ meritless assault on the First Amendment compels dismissal now.”

The network’s legal team also argued that Trump and Jackson lack standing, saying that they cannot rely on “intangible ‘harms’” that are “common to the public at large.”

CBS’ legal team wrote, “President Trump has not plausibly alleged that he personally suffered ‘an injury to a commercial interest in reputation or sales.’”

In a preview of the Harris interview that aired on Face the Nation on October 6, the vice president was shown giving an answer to a question about Israel-Gaza that was different than the one that was featured on the 60 Minutes broadcast the next day.

CBS and 60 Minutes have said that there was no deception, and that the first part of Harris’ answer was shown on Face the Nation and the second part on 60 Minutes because of time constraints. They also have provided unedited transcripts and video of the interview to the FCC, which is weighing a separate complaint against the network that was filed by a consumer group.

The lawsuit is taking place as Paramount Global seeks Trump administration approval for its merger with Skydance Media. Both sides in the legal case have been involved in mediation, something that has raised speculation that Paramount is seeking to resolve the lawsuit and pave the way for its merger. Democratic senators have warned Paramount Global’s Shari Redstone that a settlement may violate federal bribery statutes.

In another filing, CBS also challenged Trump’s choice of an Amarillo, TX, court to file the case, arguing that the president and Jackson had not shown that the network “purposefully directed” its activities at Texas. They argue that Texas has not real connection to the action, and that the case should be transferred to New York.

The judge overseeing the case is Matthew J. Kacsmaryk, who was appointed by Trump and has a history of siding with groups on the right on issues like abortion and LGBTQ rights. He is the only judge assigned to the Amarillo division where the case was filed.

Last week, Trump appeared to praise David Ellison, the CEO of Skydance Media, when asked by a reporter about the status of the merger. But he then went into his criticisms of the 60 Minutes edits.

Sign Up