President-elect Donald Trump has submitted a brief to the U.S. Supreme Court seeking to forestall the enforcement of a statute mandating that TikTok either divest its U.S. operations or cease functioning entirely by January 19.
The timing of this deadline, occurring mere days before Trump’s inauguration, has sparked calls for a postponement to allow the incoming administration to address the issue comprehensively.
Notably, the brief sidesteps the core constitutional question concerning First Amendment protections, an issue scheduled for Supreme Court review next month. Instead, it emphasizes Trump’s preference to resolve the matter through diplomatic and political negotiation upon assuming office.
“President Trump opposes banning TikTok in the United States at this juncture,” the document asserts, highlighting his self-proclaimed acumen in deal-making as uniquely suited to reconciling national security imperatives with the platform’s utility to its 170 million U.S. users.
The brief also underscores Trump’s extensive engagement with social media, referencing his 14.7 million TikTok followers as indicative of his cognizance of the platform’s centrality to free expression and political dialogue. “President Trump is one of the most powerful and prolific users of social media in history,” it states, arguing that his firsthand experience equips him to evaluate TikTok’s significance as a vehicle for political and expressive freedoms.
In contrast, TikTok’s legal response critiques the legislation as an infringement on First Amendment rights, asserting that it imposes restrictions on speech without substantive evidence of necessity.
Meanwhile, the Biden administration defends the law as a critical safeguard for U.S. national security, pointing to concerns about TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, and its affiliations with the Chinese government. “The law addresses serious threats posed by the Chinese government’s control of TikTok, which harvests sensitive data on millions of Americans and could serve as a tool for foreign influence operations,” the administration’s brief contends.
Opposition to the statute has also arisen from TikTok users and creators, who argue that the sweeping measures violate Americans’ free expression rights. A user-filed brief characterizes the law as unprecedented, stating, “The sweeping actions against TikTok unjustly curtail Americans’ speech, defying our history and constitutional traditions.”
Court has scheduled a special session for January 10 to hear arguments from TikTok and a related case brought by the platform’s content creators. A ruling is anticipated before the January 19 deadline, carrying profound implications for national security policy, technology regulation, and constitutional freedoms in the digital age.
The contested legislation compels ByteDance to divest its U.S. operations or face a nationwide ban on TikTok, citing concerns about the company’s ownership structure and exposure to Chinese regulatory oversight. ByteDance’s incorporation in the Cayman Islands, coupled with its headquarters in Beijing, has intensified apprehensions regarding undue influence by the Chinese government.
This case encapsulates a pivotal discourse at the nexus of technology, international relations, and constitutional law.
The Supreme Court’s decision will not only shape TikTok’s trajectory within the United States but also establish critical precedents for the governance of global digital platforms in an era of heightened geopolitical and security concerns.
Read More: China Building Over 200 Specialized Detention Facilities As Xi Jinping Widens Anti-Corruption Drive
