Carl Schmitt became somewhat entangled with the Nazis and later distanced himself from them.

The quote claims only entanglement; the proposition adds a later distancing, so judge both. True: Schmitt joined the Nazi Party (1933) and served the regime (e.g. legal posts, writings defending Nazi actions), and he later stepped back or distanced himself (e.g. was sidelined after SS attacks in 1936 and withdrew from party roles, or disavowed the regime after the war). Mostly true: the entanglement is confirmed and he was pushed out or withdrew, but historians stress that he never truly repudiated Nazism, so 'distanced himself' is only partly accurate. Mixed: the entanglement is confirmed but the distancing is largely unsupported, or vice versa. Mostly false: 'somewhat entangled' seriously understates a deep and lasting commitment, and the distancing did not happen. False: Schmitt had no involvement with the Nazis.

Set before the research began.

1. E1 NDB-Artikel: Schmitt, Carl Neue Deutsche Biographie (Historische Kommission bei der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften); author Reinhard Mehring · 2007

   “Obwohl S. vor 1933 eine Selbstaufgabe des Weimarer Präsidialsystems und eine Machtübergabe an Hitler verhindern wollte, stellte er sich sofort auf das neue Regime ein, trat am 1.5.1933 der NSDAP bei und wirkte in zahlreichen Ämtern und Schlüsselpositionen an der nationalsozialistischen Gleichschaltung der Rechtswissenschaft und Justiz mit.”

2. E2 Schmitt, Carl (1888–1985) - Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy Routledge (Taylor & Francis) · 1998

   “After Hitler’s rise to power, he allied himself briefly to Nazism, and despite having fallen from favour and having revised his position even before the war, was never able to rehabilitate himself from the Nazi taint.”

3. E3 Down on Law Boston Review · 1 April 2001

   “Even after a 1936 falling-out with the SS, in which he was forced to surrender some of his political appointments, Schmitt continued to play a pivotal role in Nazi debates about international law.”

E1 (Neue Deutsche Biographie) confirms the entanglement: Schmitt joined the NSDAP on 1 May 1933 and held many offices and key positions in bringing law and the courts into line with the Nazi regime. E3 says he fell from favour and changed his position before the war. E4 says a 1936 falling-out with the SS cost him some political appointments. But E4 also says he went on playing a pivotal role in Nazi debates about international law, and E3 says he never shed the Nazi taint. So he lost favour and some posts and revised his position [E3][E4], but he kept a role in Nazi debates on international law [E4] and was never able to shed the Nazi taint [E3], so calling it distancing is only partly accurate, which fits mostly true.