Lawyers representing a major television network are seeking access to Donald Trump’s personal financial records if he proceeds with his lawsuit against them over an interview with Vice President Kamala Harris. The lawsuit, which Trump filed in Texas alongside Republican Congressman Ronny Jackson, claims that the network deceptively edited Harris’ response to a question about the Israel-Hamas war to make her more appealing to voters. Trump alleges that this manipulation was an unethical attempt to boost Harris’ public image while damaging his own presidential campaign.
The network’s legal team argues that financial discovery is necessary, particularly concerning Trump’s personal assets, his 2024 campaign finances, and the financial records of Trump Media & Technology Group, which owns the Truth Social platform. They also seek information regarding Trump’s involvement with a cryptocurrency project associated with his name.
Trump’s lawsuit initially demanded $10 billion in damages but has since been amended to seek $20 billion. The former president claims the network engaged in deceptive advertising by promoting the interview on its Sunday news program and accuses the company of unfair competition against his social media platform. The legal battle also involves the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act (DTPA), with Trump’s lawyers arguing that the network’s editing violated consumer protection laws.
The network’s attorneys have pushed back, arguing that the lawsuit is fundamentally flawed. They assert that Trump’s claims challenge editorial decision-making rather than commercial speech, making them legally invalid under both the federal Lanham Act and Texas law. The defense team also contends that Trump engaged in “judge shopping” by filing the case in Texas, where a single federal judge, appointed by Trump, presides over cases in Amarillo. In response, Trump added Rep. Jackson as a co-plaintiff to justify the Texas venue.
The network maintains that its promotional and editorial decisions are protected forms of political and journalistic expression, not commercial activity subject to consumer protection laws. In their motion to dismiss, they argue that Trump’s complaint repeatedly characterizes the issue as “news distortion” rather than deceptive trade practices, undermining the basis of his claims.
Additionally, the network’s lawyers emphasize that discovery will be required to determine whether Trump or Jackson ever purchased goods or services from the company and whether any confusion was actually caused by the interview. They also want to examine whether Trump suffered real damages or relied on any alleged misrepresentation in making financial or business decisions.
As the case moves forward, both sides are expected to engage in a protracted legal battle over the extent of discovery and the validity of Trump’s claims. If the lawsuit proceeds, Trump may be required to disclose detailed financial records related to his campaign and media ventures, an outcome the network’s attorneys argue is necessary to fully assess the case.
