In a brief filed with the US Supreme Court on Friday, TikTok reiterated its position that a law requiring the Chinese short-video app to be banned until January 19, 2025 unless it goes to a non-Chinese buyer is sold, is unconstitutional and should be blocked.

The platform’s argument in its effort to suspend the ban was unexpectedly supported by US President-elect Donald Trump, who filed an amicus brief asking the court to end the ban so that he can officially take office and the Disputes can be “settled” through “political means”.

“The closure of the platform will silence the speech of petitioners and the more than 170 million monthly American users who communicate there about politics, art, commerce and other matters of public interest – as evidenced by the massive interest expressed during the recent Presidential election was expressed.” TikTok argued in its filing.

Do you have questions about the biggest topics and trends from around the world? Get the answers with SCMP Knowledge, our new platform of curated content with explainers, FAQs, analyzes and infographics brought to you by our award-winning team.

It claimed that “Congress targeted TikTok because it disagreed with the content of content posted by TikTok users and TikTok Inc.’s alleged editorial decisions in distributing that content.”

In the filing, TikTok described itself as a U.S. company even though it is owned by ByteDance, which was founded in Beijing in 2012. According to TikTok, ByteDance “was founded by Chinese entrepreneurs, but today about 60 percent of the company is beneficially owned by global institutional investors.”

“Congress has no legitimate interest in interfering with the U.S. operator of a U.S. speech platform to change editorial decisions about the mix of content to be distributed—whether or not Congress considers some aspects of that content mix to be foreign propaganda “, it says in the letter.

In his filing, Trump acknowledged that the case “represents an unprecedented, novel and difficult tension between the right to free speech, on the one hand, and foreign policy and national security concerns, on the other,” and urged the Supreme Court “to consider a postponement.” to reflect on the deadline of the law”. for the January 19, 2025 disposal while it considers the merits of this case.

The brief described Trump as “the right constitutional actor to resolve the dispute through political means” and that he “alone has the extensive deal-making expertise, electoral mandate and political will to negotiate a solution to the platform to save and at the same time address the national “-security concerns”.

In April, Congress passed the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, which was subsequently signed into law by President Joe Biden.

The law stipulates that if ByteDance fails to sell TikTok to a non-Chinese buyer and enforce the ban, cloud service providers such as Google and Apple would be required to remove TikTok from their US app stores or face penalties. New users would be blocked from downloading the app, while existing users would not be able to update it on their devices.

On December 6, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit unanimously upheld the law, finding that “the government acted solely to protect this freedom from, and the ability of, a foreign adversary nation “Data about people in the United States.”

It also rejected TikTok and ByteDance’s request to temporarily block the ban pending a review by the Supreme Court, the country’s highest court.

The Supreme Court’s Dec. 18 decision to hear the case following an emergency request from TikTok surprised some legal analysts given the lower court panel’s unanimous decision. Oral arguments are scheduled for January 10, nine days before the ban takes effect.

After an appeals court backed a law forcing ByteDance to sell TikTok or ban the app in the United States, TikTok’s final legal option was to seek a repeal from the U.S. Supreme Court. Photo: Zuma Press Wire/dpa alt=After an appeals court backed a law forcing ByteDance to sell TikTok or ban the app in the United States, TikTok’s final legal option was an overturn by the US Supreme Court to achieve. Photo: Zuma Press Wire/dpa>

The Biden administration argues that Beijing could pressure ByteDance to manipulate the app’s algorithm and collect personal data from its users in ways that could undermine U.S. national security interests.

In its brief, TikTok said the appeals court “failed to impose the burden of proof on the government that it considered less restrictive alternatives and found them ineffective,” adding that the court “never requires the government to do so.” have to prove the legal situation”. “Core premise” that TikTok is “controlled by a foreign adversary.”

Several other amicus briefs were also filed Friday, including one from three U.S. lawmakers — Senator Edward Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts; Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky; and Rep. Ro Khanna, Democrat of California, who opposed the bill.

Their brief argued that the U.S. government “must bear a very heavy burden if it seeks to restrict expression in the name of national security,” adding that the case against TikTok “shows all the telltale signs of overreach has”.

An amicus brief from the American Civil Liberties Union in collaboration with seven other free speech organizations also argued that “national security claims do not reduce the burden on the government under the First Amendment.”

However, another filing filed by leaders of the House Special Committee on China said the U.S. Constitution “grant[s]to Congress the authority to protect Americans from foreign threats to national security.”

Rep. John Moolenaar, the committee’s Republican chairman, and Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, the ranking Democrat, claimed that Congress identified specific threats and “appropriately exercised its constitutional authority” in crafting the law.

Also in support of the law, seven other groups focused on alleged human and political rights abuses in China against Uyghurs, Tibetans and Hong Kong residents claimed that “TikTok and ByteDance are surveillance and repression tools” of the Chinese Communist Party.

Their lawsuit argued that the law contains “necessary safeguards” to prevent the Chinese government from using it to “surveil or target activists.”

Separately, Columbia University’s Knight First Amendment Institute and PEN America claimed that the law restricted Americans’ access to “ideas, information, and media from abroad.”

The groups said it failed the First Amendment test because suppressing speech is not an effective way to combat the manipulation of foreign content.

In an amicus brief filed last week, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell accused TikTok of resorting to delaying tactics in “vain hopes” that the ban would be delayed until the next administration.

On Sunday, US President-elect Donald Trump, who signed an executive order banning TikTok in his first term as president – which was struck down by a lower federal court – suggested he would offer the app a lifeline.

“We went on TikTok and had a great response with billions of views,” Trump said at an event in Phoenix, Arizona, praising the app’s contribution to his popularity among young American voters.

“They brought me a card… and when I looked at it I said maybe we can keep this sucker for a while,” he added.

As president, Trump could give TikTok an additional 90 days to find a new buyer and ask the Justice Department not to enforce the ban.

This article originally appeared in the South China Morning Post (SCMP), the most authoritative coverage of China and Asia in more than a century. For more SCMP stories, please explore the SCMP app or visit the SCMP Facebook and Facebook pages Twitter pages. Copyright © 2024 South China Morning Post Publishers Ltd. All rights reserved.

Copyright (c) 2024. South China Morning Post Publishers Ltd. All rights reserved.