TikTok, with its 170 million American users, is facing a pivotal legal challenge that could determine its future in the U.S. The case is now in the hands of a panel of three judges from the DC Circuit Court of Appeals.
Recently, TikTok and a group of creators argued against a law known as “the TikTok ban,” which demands that the app divest from its Chinese owner, ByteDance, by January 19th. TikTok contends that this ultimatum effectively constitutes a ban that would suppress free speech and limit the information accessible to Americans.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) has defended the law, asserting that it addresses national security concerns related to TikTok’s Chinese ownership. The judges—Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan, appointed by Obama, Judge Neomi Rao, appointed by Trump, and Judge Douglas Ginsburg, appointed by Reagan—seemed particularly critical of TikTok’s arguments. Their questions indicated significant skepticism, focusing more on TikTok’s position rather than the government’s justification.
Debate TikTok’s Future as U.S. Court Weighs Free Speech, National Security, and Foreign Ownership Concerns
The case involves a Congressional act, which is somewhat unusual for the DC Circuit, a court typically dealing with federal agency issues. Judge Rao highlighted that Congress does not need to adhere to the same procedural requirements as federal agencies, emphasizing that its authority is reflected in its legislative actions. Rao questioned whether TikTok’s arguments implied that Congress should be treated like an agency, which is not the case.
The judges also considered whether less severe measures, such as requiring TikTok to disclose data and content moderation practices, could address the concerns without mandating divestment.
They questioned the practicality of relying on disclosures from a company viewed as a national security risk. Judge Ginsburg noted that the law targets a category of companies controlled by foreign adversaries, not just TikTok, and pointed out the extended negotiations that have failed to resolve the issue.
After the arguments, TikTok creators expressed worries that upholding the law could set a precedent for restricting content creation by other media companies with foreign ownership. They feared that such a ruling could lead to broader constraints on free speech.
The judges also debated whether TikTok’s U.S. entity holds any First Amendment rights. Although the DOJ has sought to keep certain classified documents from being disclosed due to national security concerns, the focus remained on the constitutional and legal implications of the law. The decision could ultimately be appealed to the Supreme Court, with the deadline for divestment quickly approaching.
