The US Supreme Court on Friday upheld a law that could lead to a ban on TikTok in the US.
“There is no doubt that for more than 170 million Americans, TikTok provides a distinctive and widespread outlet for expression, a means of interaction and a source of community,” the court’s unanimous ruling said. But Congress has determined that the waiver is necessary to address well-supported national security concerns about TikTok’s data collection practices and relationship with a foreign adversary.
For more than five years, US government officials have tried to ban or compel the sale of TikTok, accusing the Chinese-owned company of sharing US users’ data with the Chinese government and filling feeds with pro-Chinese ads. Congress and agencies such as the FBI have not released much information to support these claims, but have pursued various methods to ban TikTok.
Reacting to the decision, TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew posted a video on the platform thanking future US President Donald Trump for supporting the app. “We are grateful and honored to have the support of a president who truly understands our platform,” Chu said. Someone who has used TikTok to express their thoughts and views to connect with the world, generating over 60 billion views on their content. in the process.”
Chew wouldn’t comment on whether TikTok would officially shut down on Sunday, but said, “Rest assured, we will do our best to ensure that our platform continues to be your online home for creativity.” And it is a limitless exploration as well as a source of inspiration and inspiration. Happiness for years to come.”
In 2020, former US President Donald Trump first attempted to ban TikTok through an unsuccessful executive order. Finally, US President Joe Biden signed a bill on April 24, 2024 that required TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, to sell the app to an American owner by January 19 or be removed from US app stores. In a rush to avoid the ban, TikTok and a group of creators quickly filed suit against the Justice Department, arguing that the law, the Act to Protect Americans from Applications Controlled by Foreign Adversaries, violated their First Amendment rights.
In oral arguments Friday, TikTok attorney Noel Francisco and Jeffrey Fisher, who represents the creators, tried to wrap up the argument. For the government, Solicitor General Elizabeth Perlugar argued that the law does not violate the defendants’ free speech rights and instead insulates the app from the influence of ByteDance and China.
“Undoubtedly, the solution Congress and the President chose here is remarkable,” wrote Justice Neil Gorsuch in a concurring opinion. I don’t know if this law will succeed in achieving its goals or not. A determined foreign adversary may simply seek to replace one missing surveillance program with another. “As time passes and threats evolve, less dramatic and more effective solutions may emerge.”
In its opinion, the court cast doubt on TikTok’s main argument that the law violated the company’s free speech rights, writing that “the challenged provisions are content neutral.” The judges wrote that the law does not appear to regulate the speech of TikTok or its creators, and instead targets ByteDance’s program and corporate structure.
