TikTok challenges US “sell or ban” law in court

TikTok said in court on Monday that a US law that could lead to its ban if ByteDance does not sell TikTok will have a “staggering” impact on the freedom of speech of American users. The law was passed due to concerns that the data of TikTok users in the United States could be used by the Chinese government. TikTok and ByteDance have repeatedly denied any ties to the Chinese authorities. This is reported by the BBC, according to UNN. 

Details

In May, the companies filed a lawsuit to block the legislation, calling it unconstitutional and effectively restricting the freedom of speech of TikTok's 170 million users in the United States. On Monday, a three-judge panel of the Washington Court of Appeals heard TikTok's arguments.

Lawyer Tiffany Cianci said that the use of the platform by politicians ahead of the 2024 presidential election looks “hypocritical” and raises doubts about the validity of security concerns. “If it was dangerous, they wouldn't be there,” she added.

US Department of Justice lawyer Daniel Tenney objected to TikTok's defense, arguing that the platform's code is based in the United States.

 “There is no doubt here that the recommendation algorithm is maintained, developed and written by ByteDance, not TikTok in the United States,” he said. “This is not the expression of Americans in the United States - this is the expression of Chinese engineers in China.

Concerns have also been raised that TikTok could be used by the Chinese government to spread propaganda in the United States. However, advocates of freedom of speech in the United States, guaranteed by the First Amendment to the Constitution, say that support for a “sell or ban” law would be a gift to authoritarian regimes around the world.

Xiangnong Wang, a lawyer at Columbia University's First Amendment Institute, noted that repressive regimes could use this precedent to justify new restrictions on their citizens' access to information and media from abroad.

James Lewis of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C., argues that the law was designed to withstand judicial scrutiny. “The basic arguments against TikTok are very strong,” he said. “The key question is whether the court will accept that the sales requirement does not regulate free speech.

According to experts, regardless of the appellate court's decision, the case could last for months, if not longer, and may reach the US Supreme Court.

TikTok and ByteDance's lawyer Andrew Pincus told the court that the law imposes an extreme restriction on freedom of speech based on uncertain future risks. He also emphasized that TikTok “does not belong” to China. China, but is owned by ByteDance Limited, a company in the Cayman Islands. However, Judge Sri Srinivasan replied that the company is “subject to Chinese control”.

TikTok's lawyers argue that the US government is not accusing the company of any wrongdoing, and the punishment is being applied based on the assumption of possible problems in the future. Judge Ginsberg emphasized that the law imposes an “absolute ban on the current management of the company”, not the company itself, and is directed against a group of companies controlled by a so-called foreign adversary, not just TikTok.

Lawyer Jeffrey Fisher, who represents content creators on the platform, expressed concern that the law could limit their constitutional right to work with a publisher of their choice, such as TikTok under its current owner.

TikTok deletes over 2600 Russian propaganda channels - CPJAug 30 2024, 03:04 PM • 28157 views