The Supreme Court faces a crucial decision on Friday, grappling with the intersection of free speech and national security in a case centered on TikTok. The platform, used by roughly half of Americans, faces a January 19th shutdown unless the court intervenes.
TikTok's impending closure hinges on a law requiring its sale by its Chinese parent company. The company argues the law violates free speech, while the Biden administration defends it as a necessary measure to counter potential national security threats posed by Chinese control.
President-elect Donald Trump has added a layer of complexity, urging the court to allow time for a "political resolution." This unusual intervention raises questions about the court's consideration of this politically charged plea.
The case, deeply affecting TikTok users and content creators, underscores the substantial impact of the potential ruling on their livelihoods and the broader digital landscape.
Lawyers for users and creators emphasized the case's significant implications for free speech, highlighting the unprecedented number of individuals directly impacted by the court's decision.
Experts note the court's inherent challenges in evaluating the case, particularly concerning a platform like TikTok, with which the justices have limited direct experience, but still grapple with potentially sweeping impacts on speech restrictions.
The Biden administration asserts that Chinese control of TikTok presents a severe national security risk. However, TikTok counters that no verifiable evidence of such actions has been presented.
A unanimous appellate court ruling upheld the law. The Supreme Court's decision is looming large, with a potential resolution within days, and only a two-hour hearing. This hearing, which will likely extend significantly past the allotted time, features renowned litigators such as Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar and Noel Francisco.
The timing of the case, just nine days before the law's enforcement date and 10 days before a new administration takes office, adds further tension. This timeline introduces further pressure, as delaying the law would affect the newly elected administration. The new president-elect's desire for a political resolution could impact the immediate outcome of the case.
The court must determine the appropriate level of scrutiny for the law. TikTok and supporters argue for strict scrutiny, a high standard almost always resulting in legal defeat for laws challenged under this metric. Conversely, the Biden administration and its allies cite precedent regarding foreign ownership restrictions in other sectors of the economy to defend the TikTok ban.
