Argues that national security concerns are not enough to justify curtailing free speech
TikTok is taking legal action against the U.S. government in response to a recently passed bill aimed at compelling the app’s Chinese owner to sell or face a ban. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for Washington, D.C., contends that the bill, known as the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, infringes upon constitutional protections of free speech. Describing the law as an “unprecedented violation” of the First Amendment, TikTok argues that Congress has never before enacted a law targeting a specific speech platform for a nationwide ban.
The core argument revolves around the claim that invoking national security concerns does not justify restricting free speech. TikTok asserts that the burden lies with the federal government to prove the necessity of such restrictions, a burden it claims the government has not met.
The Department of Justice and the White House have yet to respond to requests for comment, but John Moolenaar, the chairman of the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, defended the law, stating that both Congress and the Executive Branch have concluded that TikTok poses a grave national security risk. He expressed confidence that the legislation will stand.
This legal challenge comes amid a multiyear effort by the U.S. government to address concerns surrounding TikTok’s operations. TikTok has faced scrutiny under both the Trump and Biden administrations, with concerns over data collection, security practices, and the app’s algorithm. While some experts have questioned the validity of these concerns, TikTok has attempted to reassure the public and officials through initiatives like “Project Texas,” aimed at enhancing data security and transparency.
However, TikTok’s lawsuit argues that Congress has failed to provide evidence justifying the law’s restrictions on data security or foreign propaganda. It further claims that the law violates the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause and constitutes an unconstitutional bill of attainder.
According to TikTok, the law effectively amounts to a ban, as ByteDance’s option to divest its U.S. business is impractical within the given timeframe. If upheld, the lawsuit warns, the law could set a precedent for the government to compel other platforms to sell or shut down based on national security concerns.
Gautam Hans, an associate clinical professor of law at Cornell University, expressed skepticism about the law’s validity, noting the lack of public discussion on the specific risks posed by TikTok. He acknowledged that overcoming congressional support for the law would be challenging for TikTok.
The lawsuit was filed in the D.C. Court of Appeals due to Exclusive Jurisdiction outlined in the law. This court, often regarded as the nation’s second-highest court, will decide the fate of TikTok’s legal challenge.
Leave a Reply