Why is Trump’s lawsuit against CBS patently absurd?

In the closing weeks of the 2024 presidential election, no issue has galvanized Donald Trump more than his obsession with “60 Minutes.”

Briefly summaryVice President Kamala Harris sat down for an interview with the news program in early October; Some of his answers were edited over time — a standard practice in television journalism — and the former Republican president has spent nearly every day since pretending it was some kind of scandal.

There is Trump, among other thingsCalling for CBS to lose its broadcast license, calling for “60 Minutes” to be taken off the air, calling the show and network a “threat to democracy,” calling the fictitious controversy “the biggest scandal in the history of broadcasting,” and even calling the non-story this way:completely illegal.”

There is network explained patiently that the allegations were unfounded and that the regulatory process was routine and fair. Still, Trump’s lawyers recently wrote to CBS News: threat of lawsuit. They obviously weren’t kidding. Reuters reported:

The GOP candidate — I kid you not — is seeking $10 billion in damages.

“Former President Trump’s repeated claims against 60 Minutes are false,” a CBS News spokesperson said. “Trump’s lawsuit against CBS today is completely unwarranted, and we will vigorously defend against it.”

As a legal matter, the idea that CBS News engaged in “election interference” is difficult to take seriously. The former president recently wrote on his online platform: he has “EVIDENCE” to prove his outlandish claims, but has not shared any such evidence to date.

As a political matter, the Harris campaign has spent a lot of time and energy trying to tell voters that Trump is overly focused on revenge and retaliation, not problem solving. The Republican’s shift of focus to CBS in the final days of the race appears to reinforce the Democrats’ frame: Trump has a list of enemies, while Harris has a to-do list.

But my favorite part of this story is that the lawsuit was filed in federal court in the Northern District of Texas. Please tell me, why would the former president’s lawyers file the case there? I’m glad you asked.

CBS is not based in Texas. Trump doesn’t live in Texas. The Trump campaign is not based in Texas. The “60 Minutes” interview with Harris did not take place in Texas. This story has nothing to do with Texas.

But Republican lawyers filed the lawsuit there anyway, and The Washington Post I ran a report This helped explain why: “The long-term claim was filed in the Northern District of Texas courthouse, where Trump candidate Matthew J. Kacsmaryk is the sole judge.”

To be sure, the official explanation The reason the lawsuit was filed in the Northern District of Texas is because the “60 Minutes” interview was broadcast by the regional CBS affiliate and some Texans likely saw it.

But there’s no point in playing games here. Trump’s lawyers wanted to take this case before a highly controversial judge appointed by Trump. Becoming the go-to lawyer for GOP plaintiffs He’s looking for a legitimate ally on the bench.

For example, the person who took on this task was Kacsmaryk. Suspending FDA approval of mifepristone last year, based largely on highly questionable research – has since withdrawn. (After all, it was decided canceled for procedural reasons.)

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

When a conservative group wanted to challenge energy efficiency standards, they thought it would be a good idea to file a lawsuit In the Kacsmaryk region. When a conservative group wanted to challenge the administration’s protections for LGBTQ+ students, they followed suit.

It’s as if Trump’s lawyers decided to present the legal and political world with another case study of why reforms to reduce judge shopping are needed.