Attorneys for CBS are urging a federal judge in Texas to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Donald Trump, accusing the former president of “naked forum-shopping” in an attempt to have his case heard by a judge perceived as more sympathetic to his claims. The $20 billion lawsuit stems from an October 2024 60 Minutes interview with then-Vice President Kamala Harris, which Trump alleges was deceptively edited to favor Democrats, amounting to “unlawful election interference.”
The complaint was initially filed in November 2024 in the Northern District of Texas Amarillo Division, where U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee known for his conservative rulings, is the lone federal judge. CBS and its parent company, Paramount Global, argue that the court lacks jurisdiction because the case has no meaningful ties to Texas.
Trump, a Florida resident, is suing media companies based in New York over an interview that took place in Washington, D.C., was edited in New York, and was broadcast nationwide from New York. CBS contends that Trump cannot simply select a jurisdiction that has little or no connection to the events in question.
Anticipating challenges on jurisdictional grounds, Trump amended the lawsuit last month to include Texas Rep. Ronny Jackson, a Republican from Amarillo and his former White House doctor. The amended complaint claims that Jackson, as a consumer of CBS news content, was “injured” by the broadcast. CBS attorneys dismissed this as an obvious ploy to create a jurisdictional link, pointing out that there is no evidence Jackson even watched the program or suffered harm.
The network also pushed back against Trump’s assertion that local CBS-affiliated stations in Amarillo have employees with relevant knowledge, arguing that the complaint fails to identify any such individuals or specify their supposed insights.
Judge Kacsmaryk has drawn attention for previous rulings favoring conservative causes, including blocking efforts to end the “Remain in Mexico” policy and attempting to revoke FDA approval of an abortion medication decisions that were ultimately overturned. Other Republican officials have also been accused of strategically filing cases in his court to increase their chances of a favorable ruling.
Legal experts have widely criticized Trump’s lawsuit as a meritless political stunt aimed at undermining both Harris and mainstream media outlets that have reported critically on him. The lawsuit has been described as an abuse of the legal system, consistent with Trump’s pattern of using litigation against perceived opponents. Some attorneys have even suggested that disciplinary action could be warranted against those involved in filing the complaint.
Journalism scholars have characterized the lawsuit as an effort to discredit mainstream media, particularly outlets that have reported on Trump’s controversial remarks and falsehoods. Others have called it an outrageous attack on First Amendment principles, arguing that it is so baseless that it could warrant sanctions for being frivolous.
The case continues to draw scrutiny, with legal analysts viewing it as part of a broader strategy to challenge unfavorable media coverage and rally political support.
