President Trump’s threat of a “tortious interference” lawsuit against the New York Times appears to be a longshot — but a confrontation  between the 47th president and the paper of record could yield unpredictable results.

The specter of a suit was raised in a Truth Social post from Mr. Trump defending his $20 billion lawsuit against CBS. That litigation concerns an interview “60 Minutes” conducted with Vice President Harris that Mr. Trump alleges was deceitfully edited in an attempt to help Ms. Harris’s electoral prospects. The Times reports that a settlement could be near in the case, which, CBS’s parent company Paramount hopes, will clear the path for the sale of Paramount to Skydance.

CBS has contended in court that Mr. Trump’s victory over Ms. Harris in November’s presidential election rendered his claims moot. Mr. Trump, though, argues that the editing at issue “improperly diverted” viewers to “60 Minutes” rather than his own platform of Truth Social.  

Even as CBS unsuccessfully seeks to have the case dismissed in court — the presiding judge, Matthew Kacsmaryk, has been denied those motions — top Paramount executives have been on a glide path to a settlement. The Times, in its coverage of Mr. Trump’s lawsuit, wrote that “legal experts have called the suit baseless and an easy victory for CBS.” 

Mr. Trump appears to think otherwise. In his Truth Social posting, he reflects that “the Failing New York Times … claims that ‘people’ said that the case is baseless. They … have a non-curable case of TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME, possibly to the point where the Times’ interjection makes them liable for tortious interference, including in Elections, which we are intently studying.”

The Legal Information Institute explains that “tortious interference” is a “claim for damages against a defendant who wrongfully and intentionally interferes with the plaintiff’s contractual or business relationships.” The basis for the claim appears to be the Times’s reckoning about the “baseless” suit.

For Mr. Trump to succeed on a tortious interference claim, he would be required to prove, under a preponderance of the evidence standard, that the Times possessed an “intent to interfere” with his lawsuit and that it was not just reporting the facts as it adduced them. Even a longshot case against the Times, though, could be a political winner for Mr. Trump.

The Walt Disney Company last year settled a defamation suit brought by Mr. Trump for $15 million in damages — to be donated to his presidential library — plus $1 million in legal fees. At issue were comments made by an ABC News personality, George Stephanopolous, who said repeatedly on the “This Week” program that Mr. Trump had been “found liable for rape.” That was false. Mr. Trump was found liable for “sexually abusing” a sex and romance columnist, E. Jean Carroll, and for defaming her when he denied her accusations. He has been ordered to pay more than $80 million and the matter is under appeal.   

The possibility of a settlement with CBS as a prelude to the Trump administration approving the sale of Paramount has roiled the already embattled ranks of CBS News. The longtime executive producer  of “60 Minutes,” Bill Owens, resigned last week and his friend and colleague, Scott Pelley, delivered a scathing on-air rebuke of Paramount’s controlling shareholder, Shari Redstone, who is pushing for a settlement and a deal. 

While Mr. Pelley did not name Ms. Redstone, he lamented that Paramount is moving to “supervise our content in new ways,” particularly around coverage of Gaza and the Trump administration. Ms. Redstone stands to make billions of dollars if the complex deal is approved by Mr. Trump’s regulators. 

Even as CBS and Mr. Trump’s attorneys duke it out in court, “60 Minutes” has repeatedly broadcast segments attacking the Trump administration. Both CBS and “60 Minutes” have also been dogged by criticism that their coverage of the Gaza conflict suffers from anti-Israel bias.

A longtime “60 Minutes” correspondent, Lesley Stahl, has come in for criticism for asking an American-Israeli freed hostage of Hamas, Keith Siegel, “Do you think they starved you or they just didn’t have food?” Mr. Siegel responded: “No, I think they starved me, and they would often eat in front of me and not offer me food.” 

The Times declares in a statement that “President Trump’s post today follows a long list of legal threats aimed at discouraging or penalizing independent reporting about the administration.” The paper insists that it will “not be deterred by the administration’s intimidation tactics.”

The Gray Lady is coming off a victory in another high-profile civil lawsuit — against Governor Palin, who last week lost her defamation retrial against the Times. That suit turned on an editorial from 2017 that suggested, wrongly, that she had incited a deadly shooting in Arizona. That attack wounded Congresswoman Gabby Giffords and killed six others.