Home | News | The Supreme Court’s Key Arguments on Tiktok Ban

The Supreme Court’s Key Arguments on Tiktok Ban

Photo:© Salarko | Dreamstime.com

10 Views

By Middle Land Staff

January 17, 2025
4:51 pm
Los Angeles, CA

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments last week over whether the federal law—which requires TikTok to separate from parent company ByteDance or else be banned—is in violation of the First Amendment. The law is now scheduled to take effect Sunday, unless the Supreme Court rules otherwise, as the court previously declined to pause the law from taking effect while it considered the case. TikTok and content creators on the app argued the ban violates their First Amendment rights by cutting off all speech on the platform, while the federal government argued the ban is necessary for national security, given ByteDance’s Chinese ownership. Justices on both sides of the aisle appeared skeptical of TikTok’s arguments, with Justices Elena Kagan and Amy Coney Barrett questioning how TikTok’s First Amendment rights are

The law is now scheduled to take effect Sunday, unless the Supreme Court rules otherwise, as the court previously declined to pause the law from taking effect while it considered the case.

TikTok and content creators on the app argued the ban violates their First Amendment rights by cutting off all speech on the platform, while the federal government argued the ban is necessary for national security, given ByteDance’s Chinese ownership.

Justices on both sides of the aisle appeared skeptical of TikTok’s arguments, with Justices Elena Kagan and Amy Coney Barrett questioning how TikTok’s First Amendment rights are implicated when the law is specifically targeting ByteDance—a foreign-owned company—and its algorithm.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson suggested TikTok was “wrong” that the case violates its First Amendment rights, and said she thought the case was more about TikTok wanting to associate with ByteDance than its speech being silenced.

Chief Justice John Roberts said the federal law was “not a burden on” TikTok and its users’ “expression at all,” arguing Congress was fine with users’ speech on the app but just not a “foreign adversary” gathering information about the app’s users.

Justice Samuel Alito asked TikTok creators’ attorney about whether his clients would actually be harmed if TikTok went away or if they could just go to a different platform, questioning whether their attachment to TikTok was akin to “somebody’s attachment to an old article of clothing” that could be replaced or if ByteDance had truly created a “magical algorithm” that no other tech company could possibly replicate.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh brought up past examples of the U.S. blocking broadcasting companies from having ties to foreign governments and brought up the government’s concerns about TikTok collecting data on U.S. users, which he said “seems like a huge concern for the future of the country.”