The Supreme Court appeared inclined on January 10 to uphold a law that would force the sale or ban of the popular short-video app TikTok in the United States by January 19, citing national security concerns about China.
During over two hours of arguments, the nine justices questioned lawyers representing TikTok, its Chinese parent company ByteDance, and app users about the potential risks of China’s government exploiting the platform to spy on Americans and conduct covert influence operations, while also considering free speech concerns.
Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts questioned whether the court should ignore the fact that ByteDance is subject to Chinese intelligence work. The companies and users sued to block the law, passed by Congress with bipartisan support in 2024 and signed by outgoing Democratic President Joe Biden. They appealed a lower court’s ruling that upheld the law, arguing it violates the First Amendment’s protection against government abridgment of free speech.
Some justices expressed concerns about the law’s impact on free speech, but the prevailing concern centered on the national security implications of a foreign-owned social media platform that collects data from 170 million American users.
Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh raised questions about the long-term risks of China gathering data on users, especially those who joined the app at a young age, and using that information for espionage or blackmail.
The case comes amid rising trade tensions between the US and China. Republican Donald Trump, set to begin his second term as president on January 20, opposes the ban and urged the court to delay the January 19 deadline for divestiture to allow his administration to pursue a political resolution.
TikTok’s lawyer, Noel Francisco, argued that the app is one of the most popular speech platforms for Americans and would essentially shut down without a divestiture. He asked the justices to put a temporary hold on the law to allow for careful consideration of the issue.
Conservative Justice Samuel Alito suggested the possibility of an administrative stay to temporarily freeze the law while the justices decide how to proceed.
Liberal Justice Elena Kagan highlighted the competing concerns over national security and free speech, questioning whether Congress could have forced the American Communist Party to sever ties with the Soviet Union in the 1950s.
Solicitor-General Elizabeth Prelogar, representing the Biden administration, argued that Chinese government control of TikTok poses a grave threat to American national security. She cited TikTok’s immense data set on American users as a powerful tool for harassment, recruitment, and espionage, and emphasized the long tradition of barring foreign control of US communication channels.
The Supreme Court’s decision on this case will have significant implications for the future of TikTok and the broader landscape of national security and free speech in the United States.