Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments Friday morning on whether social media platform TikTok should be required to split from its Chinese-owned parent company or be banned in the U.S., in a closely watched case that pits national security concerns against free speech protections . Judges, both conservative and liberal, seem skeptical of the social media app’s arguments.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted Friday that the case appears to be the first to be tried focusing directly on ownership of a platform or app, rather than speech.
The liberal judiciary also questioned whether a court could view a seizure claim under the law as a data control case rather than a free speech issue, as TikTok’s legal team tried to frame it. Weighing the case as a data control case would trigger a lower level of scrutiny—a point Francisco also conceded.
That consideration could undermine TikTok’s core argument at hand, which is that the government didn’t consider less restrictive alternatives before jumping to an outright ban.
“I don’t think any of our cases have suggested that we have to use the least restrictive means under close supervision,” Sotomayor said.
Participants hold signs in support of TikTok outside the US Capitol building on March 13, 2024 in Washington, DC, as lawmakers voted to pass a bill requiring TikTok to separate from its Chinese parent company ByteDance within nine months. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
Noel Francisco, TikTok’s lawyer, told judges in oral arguments Friday that the U.S. government “does not have a valid interest in preventing foreign propaganda” and that he believes the platform and its owners should be entitled to the highest level of free speech protection under the U.S. Constitution.
Francisco told Chief Justice John Roberts that he believes the court should give TikTok First Amendment protections because it operates as a U.S. subsidiary.
TikTok’s lawyer also came under fire for the Chinese government’s control over the app and ByteDance’s control over the algorithm that displays certain content to users.
Asked by Judge Neil Gorsuch whether any parts of the referral mechanism were under Chinese control, Francisco said no.
“That means there are many parts of the source code that are embodied in intellectual property, that are owned by the Chinese government” and that would be restricted from sale or confiscation, he said. “That doesn’t change the fact that this is run in the United States by TikTok Corporation.”
Unless the judiciary intervenes or TikTok’s owners agree to a sale, the app will be banned from operating in the US until January 19.
Oral arguments focused on the level of First Amendment protection that should be granted to TikTok and its foreign owner, ByteDance.
This is not the first time the Supreme Court has grappled with whether or not the full First Amendment protections should be extended to foreign speakers. In previous cases, they ruled that the speech of a foreign government or individuals is not entitled to full protection.
The Biden administration, for its part, will argue that the law focuses solely on the company’s control of the app, which administration lawyers argue could pose “serious national security threats” to Americans, not its content.
Administration lawyers will also argue that Congress did not impose any restrictions on speechmuch less any restrictions based on viewpoint or content, and therefore does not meet the First Amendment’s test for violating free speech.
President-elect Donald Trump’s X account shown on a smartphone with the TikTok logo. (Photo by Avishek Das / SOPA Images/Sipa USA)
The court’s decision could have major consequences for the approximately 170 million Americans who use the app.
The US Supreme Court building in Washington, DC (AP Photo/Mariam Zuhaib))
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Judges agreed in December to hold an expedited hearing and will have just nine days to rule before the ban takes effect on January 19.
The oral argument began a little after 10 am. Stay tuned here for live updates as the oral argument unfolds.
