A panel of federal judges raised questions about TikTok’s legal defense in a landmark case concerning the future of the popular video-sharing platform in the US.
On Monday, during a two-hour hearing at the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, TikTok faced tough scrutiny over its challenge to a law that could force its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, to divest or risk a nationwide ban.
The case stems from concerns among lawmakers and intelligence officials that ByteDance’s Chinese ownership poses a national security threat, fearing that the Chinese government could access sensitive data on US users or manipulate content. The law, passed in April, gives ByteDance until January 19, 2024, to sell TikTok to a non-Chinese company or face prohibition.
During the hearing, two of the three judges expressed skepticism toward TikTok’s arguments, particularly its claim that Congress overstepped its authority by targeting the app for divestment. Judge Neomi Rao suggested that TikTok’s reasoning presented “a strange framework” for interpreting Congress’s powers, while Judge Douglas Ginsburg dismissed the argument that the law unfairly singled out TikTok as “blinkered.”
However, the court did not give the government an easy pass either. Judges pressed on how the ban could potentially violate the First Amendment rights of TikTok’s US users. Questions were raised about the implications of restricting speech on a platform that is integral to many users’ ability to communicate and express themselves.
The New York Times, Axios, and CNN contributed to this report.
