TikTok hasn’t had a great day in court

Death may be coming to pass after the Supreme Court heard arguments Friday on the constitutionality of a law that would force TikTok’s Chinese owners, ByteDance, to pull out of the social media platform or see the app, used by nearly 170 million Americans, banned in the states. United

The ruling is expected before the law’s January 19 divestment deadline and before court observers I mentioned That judges back Skeptical of TikTok’s arguments. ByteDance and a group of TikTok creators already They lost their case in a lower federal court last month, paving the way for a final appeal to the Supreme Court.

The case revolves around A Bipartisan law It was passed by Congress and signed by President Joe Biden earlier this year that would ban TikTok from operating in the United States unless ByteDance relinquishes control of its US subsidiary. It was intelligence officials and lawmakers Raise the alarm has debated ownership of TikTok for years, arguing that the company’s addictive algorithm serves as a propaganda machine for the Chinese government and that the data the app collects on users threatens U.S. national security.

US Attorney Elizabeth Prelogar emphasized these points on Friday, saying that “R“The Chinese government could weaponize TikTok at any time,” using the massive amounts of sensitive data the app collects to blackmail Americans or using its influence over ByteDance’s ownership. An algorithm to “secretly manipulate the platform to achieve its geopolitical goals.”

Noel Francisco, TikTok’s lawyer, said that the law directly aims to suppress certain ideas and content and therefore violates the freedom of expression rights of TikTok (the American subsidiary). Furthermore, he said Congress had not considered less restrictive options to prevent the Chinese government from accessing the data TikTok collects on American users. He said the law would essentially force TikTok to shut down, because selling the platform would be very difficult and even if another entity bought the US subsidiary, it wouldn’t be able to use ByteDance’s recommendation algorithm that made TikTok so popular.

The case hinges on several basic questions: Is a law that prohibits a foreign entity from controlling a publisher an impermissible restriction on protected expression? If so, does Congress have a compelling enough national security case for the law to survive the court’s strict standard of scrutiny for cases that pit national security against First Amendment protections?

Throughout the two-and-a-half-hour hearing, Prelogar and several justices repeatedly pointed out that the law does not force TikTok to shut down. Under the new owner, the US version of the app will be able to switch to a different recommendation algorithm — even one that promotes pro-China content — as long as the Chinese government itself does not have a backdoor to the app.

While judges could make a clear decision to uphold or strike down the law, they could also choose to temporarily put the case on hold in order to allow President-elect Donald Trump to negotiate a settlement — something TikTok’s lawyers seemed happy to accept. Trump submitted a memorandum to the court days before the hearing requesting this postponement.