WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court appeared poised on Friday to uphold a law compelling TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, to sell the popular video-sharing app or face a shutdown.
The law, enacted to address national security fears, could force TikTok, which has 170 million American users, out of U.S. app stores and web services if ByteDance does not divest by January 19.
In a two-and-a-half-hour session, justices from both conservative and liberal wings expressed skepticism toward TikTok’s First Amendment defense, which argues that the forced sale constitutes a restriction on free speech.
“This case ultimately boils down to speech,” said TikTok’s counsel, Noel Francisco. “What we’re talking about is ideas. If the First Amendment means anything, it means that the government cannot restrict speech.”
However, the justices seemed unconvinced. Justice Samuel Alito underscored the risks of foreign influence, stating, “There’s a good reason for saying that a foreign government, particularly an adversary, does not have free speech rights in the United States.”
Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Chief Justice John Roberts highlighted the national security concerns that spurred the law, known as the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act.
“I think Congress and the president were concerned that China was accessing information about millions of Americans,” Kavanaugh said.
Roberts questioned the potential for Chinese government interference through ByteDance.
“Are we supposed to ignore the fact that the ultimate parent is subject to doing intelligence work for the Chinese government?” he asked.
Francisco countered that Congress could have adopted less drastic measures, such as restricting data sharing with foreign entities.
“They never even considered that most obvious alternative,” he argued.
When pressed on the consequences of non-compliance by January 19, Francisco acknowledged that TikTok would “go dark,” effectively shutting down its operations in the U.S.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett challenged this characterization, suggesting that the law targets ByteDance’s ownership, not TikTok’s existence.
Representing the Biden administration, Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar described Chinese control of TikTok as a “grave threat” that could be weaponized against the U.S.
“There is no protected First Amendment right for a foreign adversary to exploit its control over a speech platform,” Prelogar asserted.
As ByteDance faces mounting pressure, a last-minute offer emerged from U.S. billionaire Frank McCourt, who has formed a consortium aiming to acquire TikTok’s U.S. assets.
“We look forward to working with ByteDance, President-elect Trump, and the incoming administration to get this deal done,” McCourt said.
The case adds another layer of complexity to U.S.-China relations, especially as Donald Trump, who boasts 14.7 million followers on TikTok, prepares for his second term.
Trump’s lawyer, John Sauer, has urged the Supreme Court to delay enforcement of the law to allow the new administration to explore diplomatic solutions.
