TikTok warns of potential ‘shutdown’ as Supreme Court considers stripping or banning laws

Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for free

A guide to what the 2024 US election means for Washington and the world

A U.S. Supreme Court justice appeared skeptical of TikTok’s efforts on Friday to overturn federal “divest or ban” laws, as the social media platform warned it could be “in trouble” in one of its largest markets in nine days.

Friday’s oral arguments focused on whether to allow a law to go into effect forcing TikTok’s Chinese parent company ByteDance to divest the platform by Jan. 19, the day before Donald Trump takes office as president, or face a nationwide ban.

The legislation passed last year with strong bipartisan support amid concerns the video platform could be used by Beijing for espionage purposes or to spread propaganda.

TikTok denies the accusations and claims the law violates First Amendment protections of free speech. Trump, meanwhile, pledged to “save the app” and pleaded with the Supreme Court to delay the legislative deadline to give him “an opportunity to pursue a political solution to the issues in this case” when he returns to the White House later this month.

Regardless, the court’s ruling will have broad implications for free speech in the United States and global relations with China.

During Friday’s oral arguments, judges across the ideological spectrum repeatedly questioned TikTok’s argument that the law is an attack on free speech, focusing instead on the platform being used for “covert manipulation” and how easily its data could be exploited by Beijing. Concerns about theft.

Noel Francisco, a TikTok lawyer at Jones Day, said the law “treats the company uniquely harshly, and was done so because of the government’s concerns that China might indirectly infringe on TikTok in the future.” Put pressure on”.

Chief Justice John Roberts, a conservative member of the Supreme Court, responded: “So should we ignore the fact that ultimately the parent is actually going to do intelligence work for the Chinese government?”

Supreme Court liberal Justice Elena Kagan acknowledged that the company “will suffer quite serious losses.” [but] collateral impact.” If TikTok ends up being stripped of its byte-hopping algorithm, she said, the law still “gives TikTok the ability to do what every other player in the United States can do, which is find the best available algorithm.”

U.S. Deputy Attorney General Elizabeth Preloga emphasized the government’s national security argument. Beijing’s efforts to undermine the United States by collecting “sensitive data” about Americans and its ability to force companies to hand over such material “means the Chinese government can weaponize TikTok at any time to harm the United States,” she said.

She said ByteDance had acquiesced to Beijing’s demands and claimed there was evidence it had “acted to misappropriate data…”. . . Tracking Hong Kong dissidents [and] Uyghurs in China”.

She added that ByteDance had admitted to improperly obtaining the data of two American journalists, including a reporter from the Financial Times, and had also “misappropriated American data.”

TikTok argued that a spinoff would not be technically “feasible” before the deadline. Beijing has a say under China’s export laws, but it has also expressed opposition to the sale, calling the laws “a blatant act of commercial robbery.” Francisco, a lawyer for TikTok, reiterated that point on Friday, saying a divestment would be “extremely difficult in any time frame.”

Asked what would happen if the company loses the case on January 19, Francisco responded: “From what I understand, we will be in trouble.”

The court’s ruling, expected before a Jan. 19 deadline, could decide the fate of a leading source of entertainment and news for young people that provides a livelihood for thousands of influencers and attracts top advertising revenue.

Even if the court rules against TikTok, Trump is likely to intervene once he takes power, although it’s unclear how. The president-elect’s sudden rescue mission for video apps was prompted in part by his use of the platform to engage with young voters during last year’s campaign.

Meanwhile, Trump said he wanted to maintain “competition” in a market dominated by Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta, after criticizing the US social network for being “the enemy of the people” over its alleged censorship of conservative content.