President Trump’s legal team claims he suffered “mental anguish” from CBS’s deceptively edited 60 Minutes interview with Kamala Harris, as settlement negotiations for his $20 billion lawsuit reach a critical juncture with Paramount offering $15 million while Trump demands $25 million and an apology.
Key Takeaways
- President Trump is suing CBS for $20 billion over alleged deceptive editing of a Kamala Harris 60 Minutes interview, claiming violations of Texas consumer protection laws and the federal Lanham Act
- Settlement negotiations are underway with Paramount reportedly offering $15 million while Trump demands $25 million plus an apology
- Paramount needs Trump administration approval for an $8 billion merger with Skydance Media, potentially influencing settlement negotiations
- The lawsuit argues CBS’s editing constitutes commercial speech not protected by the First Amendment and diverted viewers from Trump’s media platforms
- Several high-profile resignations at CBS have occurred amid the controversy, including 60 Minutes executive producer Bill Owens and CBS News chief Wendy McMahon
The $20 Billion Legal Battle Over Alleged Media Manipulation
President Trump’s legal team has filed a substantial objection to Paramount Global’s motion to dismiss his $20 billion lawsuit against CBS News. The case centers on a 60 Minutes segment featuring Kamala Harris that Trump alleges was deceptively edited. Originally seeking $10 billion in damages, the complaint was later amended to double that amount, making this one of the largest media lawsuits in recent history. The legal filing specifically targets what Trump’s lawyers describe as misleading editing techniques that allegedly violated both the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act and the federal Lanham Act.
“Donald Trump’s legal team claims in a new court filing that the president suffered ‘mental anguish’ over the 60 Minutes interview with Kamala Harris at the center of his $20 billion lawsuit against CBS News, arguing that the network is wielding ‘the First Amendment as a sword.’” stated Donald Trump’s legal team.
The crux of the lawsuit revolves around a specific exchange regarding U.S.-Israel relations that appeared differently when aired on “Face the Nation” versus “60 Minutes.” CBS has staunchly defended its journalism, releasing an unedited transcript of the Harris interview and describing the lawsuit as “an affront to the First Amendment” that is “without basis in law or fact.” The network maintains the broadcast was “not doctored or deceitful,” setting the stage for a contentious legal battle with significant First Amendment implications.
🇺🇸 PARAMOUNT OFFERS $15 MILLION TO SETTLE TRUMP’S CBS LAWSUIT
Paramount Global has reportedly offered $15 million to settle Trump's lawsuit against CBS News.
Trump is reportedly asking for more than $25 million and a public apology.
Talks began a month ago but the two sides… https://t.co/KBtbyFHVFb pic.twitter.com/nXqpkdR8lX
— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) May 28, 2025
Financial Harm and Media Competition Claims
A unique aspect of Trump’s legal strategy is the argument that CBS’s actions constitute commercial speech rather than protected journalism. His legal team contends that the edited interview directly competed with Trump’s media businesses, including Truth Social and Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG). This competition argument forms the foundation for the massive damages claim, suggesting that the deceptive editing drove viewers and advertising revenue away from Trump’s platforms and toward CBS, causing direct financial harm to the president’s business interests.
“Because they were misled by Defendants’ false advertising and tampering with the entirety of the Interview, viewers withheld attention from President Trump and Truth Social by directing their attention to Defendants’ media platforms. This increased Defendants’ engagement, viewership, and advertising revenue, and decreased the value of President Trump’s ownership in TMTG and other media holdings,” stated Trump’s lawyers.
The legal filings further claim that Trump “was forced to re-direct significant time, money, and effort to correcting the public record regarding the content of the Interview and Election Special.” His attorneys assert that beyond financial considerations, the president experienced “mental anguish” resulting from widespread confusion among consumers about a legacy media outlet deceptively distorting its broadcasts, and then resisting attempts to clear the public record. This emotional damage claim adds another dimension to the already complex case.
📺Wendy McMahon resigned as president of CBS News and Stations due to disagreements with the parent company, Paramount Global, over its handling of a lawsuit filed by President Trump against "60 Minutes." Her departure follows that of "60 Minutes" executive producer Bill Owens,…
— HiCyrus (@CyrusHi) May 19, 2025
Settlement Negotiations and Corporate Implications
Behind the scenes, settlement negotiations between Paramount and Trump’s team have reportedly begun, though they remain in early stages. Sources indicate Paramount has offered approximately $15 million to resolve the lawsuit, while Trump is seeking at least $25 million plus a public apology. The timing of these discussions is particularly significant as Paramount requires Trump administration approval for its pending $8 billion merger with Skydance Media, creating a complex web of legal, business, and regulatory considerations.
“The fact that such commercial speech was issued by a news organization does not insulate Defendants from liability under the First Amendment,” the objection states. “The First Amendment is no shield to news distortion,” stated Donald Trump’s legal team.
The controversy has already triggered significant internal upheaval at CBS, with both 60 Minutes executive producer Bill Owens and CBS News chief Wendy McMahon reportedly resigning. Paramount chair Shari Redstone has recused herself from the settlement negotiations, adding another layer of complexity to the proceedings. Some Democratic senators have warned that settling with Trump could expose Paramount to liability or criminal charges for bribery, with the Freedom of the Press Foundation threatening to sue Paramount if a settlement is reached.
The case is being overseen by federal judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee, who has granted multiple deadline extensions as the parties navigate the complexities of this high-profile media lawsuit. The outcome could have profound implications not only for the financial futures of the involved parties but also for the broader landscape of media law and First Amendment protections in America.
