In a crucial case for the social media era, free speech and national security collide at the Supreme Court on Friday, as arguments unfold over the fate of TikTok, a hugely popular platform used by nearly half of Americans for entertainment and information, report AP.
TikTok has announced plans to shut down in the U.S. by January 19 unless the Supreme Court either overturns or delays the implementation of a law aimed at forcing the sale of the platform by its Chinese parent company.
ByteDance’s Lemon8 gains popularity amid TikTok ban threat
With a tight deadline, the justices are also considering a request from President-elect Donald Trump, who has reversed his previous support for a ban, asking for time to reach a “political resolution” to avoid a ruling. It is uncertain whether the court will take the views of the Republican president-elect, a rare attempt to influence a case, into account.
TikTok, along with its parent company ByteDance, and content creators and users, argue that the law is a severe violation of the Constitution’s free speech protections.
Small businesses brace themselves for potentially disruptive TikTok ban
“Rarely, if ever, has the court dealt with a free-speech case that impacts so many people,” the lawyers for the users and creators stated. Many creators are anxiously awaiting a ruling that could threaten their livelihoods and are considering other platforms.
This case is another instance of the court being asked to rule on a medium with which the justices have admitted little familiarity, although they frequently weigh in on significant speech restriction issues.
The Biden administration, defending the law signed by President Joe Biden in April after it was approved by bipartisan majorities in Congress, asserts that “no one can seriously dispute that (China’s) control of TikTok through ByteDance represents a grave threat to national security.”
Officials argue that Chinese authorities could compel ByteDance to hand over data on U.S. TikTok users or manipulate the platform to control information.
However, the government “concedes that it has no evidence China has ever attempted to do so,” TikTok told the justices, adding that limitations on speech should not be justified by fears based on future potential risks.
Venezuela's top court issues a $10 million fine for TikTok over allegedly deadly video challenges
In December, a panel of three appellate judges, two appointed by Republicans and one by a Democrat, unanimously upheld the law and rejected the free speech claims under the First Amendment.
Adding to the urgency, the court is hearing arguments just nine days before the law’s scheduled implementation and 10 days before the new administration takes office.
In an unusual move, Trump’s lawyers have asked the court to temporarily block the TikTok ban while waiting for a political resolution rather than making a definitive decision.
“President Trump alone possesses the consummate dealmaking expertise, the electoral mandate, and the political will to negotiate a resolution to save the platform while addressing the national security concerns expressed by the Government — concerns which President Trump himself has acknowledged,” stated D. John Sauer, Trump’s nominee for top Supreme Court lawyer.
Trump has not taken a stance on the case’s merits, with his campaign using TikTok to connect with younger voters, especially males, and holding a meeting with TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club in Florida in December. He has 14.7 million followers on the app.
The justices have allotted two hours for arguments, though the session is expected to run longer. Three experienced Supreme Court lawyers will present arguments: Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar will defend the law for the Biden administration, former Trump Solicitor General Noel Francisco will represent TikTok and ByteDance, and Stanford Law professor Jeffrey Fisher will argue for the content creators and users in his 50th Supreme Court case.
Should the law be enacted, Trump’s Justice Department would be tasked with its enforcement. Lawyers for TikTok and ByteDance have argued that the new administration might attempt to lessen the law’s most severe consequences.
However, they also contend that a one-month shutdown would result in TikTok losing a third of its U.S. users and significant advertising revenue.
As it deliberates, the court must determine the level of scrutiny to apply to the law. Under strict scrutiny, laws typically fail. However, two appellate judges who upheld the law stated it could be one of the rare exceptions that would survive such a review.
TikTok, its users, and many supporters are urging the court to apply strict scrutiny to strike down the law.
The Democratic administration and some backers of the law argue that restrictions on foreign ownership of media and other sectors of the economy justify efforts to counter Chinese influence, citing the TikTok ban as part of that strategy.
A decision is expected soon.