TikTok Didn’t Have a Great Day in Court

The doom could come after the Supreme Court on Friday heard arguments on the constitutionality of a law that would force TikTok’s Chinese owner, ByteDance, to withdraw from the social media platform or see the app, which is used by about 170 million Americans, banned. In the United States

A ruling is expected before the January 19 divestment deadline and court watchers of the law Report The judges appeared Skeptical of TikTok’s logic. ByteDance and a group of TikTok creators already They lost their case In a lower federal court last month, that set the stage for a last-gasp appeal to the Supreme Court.

This is what the case is about Bipartisan legislation Passed by Congress and signed by President Joe Biden earlier this year, it would ban the TikTok app from operating in the US unless ByteDance relinquishes control of its US subsidiary. There have been intelligence officers and lawmakers Raise the alarm has owned TikTok for years, arguing that the company’s addictive algorithm serves as a propaganda tool for the Chinese government and that the data it collects about app users poses a threat to US national security.

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Preloger pressed the points Friday that “TThe Chinese government could weaponize TikTok at any time by using the vast amount of sensitive data the app collects to blackmail Americans, or by using its influence over ownership of ByteDance. The algorithm “covertly manipulates the platform to further its geopolitical goals.”

TikTok’s attorney, Noel Francisco, argued that the law was directly aimed at suppressing certain ideas and content, and that TikTok Inc. (American subsidiary) would violate its right to free speech. Moreover, he said, Congress has not considered less restrictive options to prevent the Chinese government from accessing data TikTok collects about US users. The law would essentially force TikTok to shut down, he said, because it would be extremely difficult to sell the platform, and even if another entity bought the US subsidiary, it wouldn’t be able to use ByteDance’s proprietary recommendation algorithm that made TikTok so popular.

The case hinges on several key questions: Is a statute prohibiting a publisher from being controlled by a foreign entity an impermissible restriction on protected speech? And if so, is there a compelling enough national security rationale for legislation by Congress that pits national security against the Court’s First Amendment protections that the Court has established a strict scrutiny standard for?

Throughout the two-and-a-half-hour hearing, Prelogger and several justices repeatedly pointed out that the law does not compel TikTok to shut down. Under a new owner, the US version of the app would be able to switch to a different recommendation algorithm—even one that promoted pro-Chinese content—as long as the Chinese government itself doesn’t put a backdoor into the app.

While the justices could make a clear determination to uphold or strike down the law, they could also choose to grant a temporary stay on the case to allow President-elect Donald Trump to negotiate a settlement — something TikTok’s lawyers seemed happy to concede. Trump made a brief request to the court for such a delay days before the hearing.