TikTok loses bid to strike down law that could ban it from the US

 

New YorkCNN — 

TikTok has lost its bid to strike down a law that could result in the platform being banned in the United States.

A US appeals court upheld the law in a ruling Friday. Denying TikTok’s argument that the law was unconstitutional, the judges found that the law does not “contravene the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States,” nor does it “violate the Fifth Amendment guarantee of equal protection of the laws.”   

The ruling means that the platform is one step closer to facing a US ban — unless it can convince Chinese parent-company ByteDance to sell and find a buyer — starting on January 19, 2025. After the deadline, US app stores and internet services could face hefty fines for hosting TikTok if it is not sold. (Under the legislation, Biden may issue a one-time extension of

 the deadline.)In a statement, TikTok indicated it would appeal the decision.

“The Supreme Court has an established historical record of protecting Americans’ right to free speech, and we expect they will do just that on this important constitutional issue,” said company spokesperson Michael Hughes. “Unfortunately, the TikTok ban was conceived and pushed through based upon inaccurate, flawed and hypothetical information, resulting in outright censorship of the American people. The TikTok ban, unless stopped, will silence the voices of over 170 million Americans here in the US and around the world on January 19th, 2025.”

ByteDance has previously indicated it will not sell TikTok.

Finding in favor of the US government     

The court’s ruling Friday largely deferred to Congress, finding that lawmakers acted within their constitutional powers and followed appropriate procedure in crafting the TikTok law. The legislation “narrowly” addressed the specific problem of TikTok’s China ties, the judges said, and “does not suppress content or require a certain mix of content.”

“People in the United States would remain free to read and share as much PRC propaganda (or any other content) as they desire on TikTok or any other platform of their choosing,” the judges said. “What the Act targets is the PRC’s ability to manipulate the content covertly. Understood in that way, the Government’s justification is wholly consonant with the First Amendment.”

Unimpressed with TikTok’s counterarguments, the judges dismissed the company’s objections to the US government’s national security concerns. TikTok only “quibbles” with how US officials have characterized its data practices, they said, and TikTok’s defense of its data collection “misses the forest for the trees.”

A key flashpoint in the case had been a proposed deal with US national security officials that TikTok claimed would have resolved the potential spying concerns. During the litigation, TikTok implied that the US government acted in bad faith by pursuing negotiations for months before suddenly cutting off communication and then backing the legislation that Biden ultimately signed. US government lawyers, meanwhile, responded that the draft deal was insufficient to resolve the security concerns.

On Friday, the judges sided with the US government on the deal negotiations, saying they “can neither fault nor second guess” the determination by US officials that the draft deal with                                                       More

                       

          M

More