Supreme Court hears TikTok’s final plea against US ban happymamay

The future of the TikTok recall or ban law now rests in the hands of the US Supreme Court after a three-hour hearing ahead of the social media platform’s impending deadline.

The court’s nine justices on Friday heard from lawyers representing TikTok, content creators and the US government on whether the law requiring it to be banned in the US – unless its parent company ByteDance sells it – threatens freedom of expression.

Noel Francisco, a former US Attorney General who appeared on the platform, emphasized that the ban would undermine this constitutional right for about 170 million American users.

A representative for platform creators said they should be free to use the publisher of their choice.

But the government urged judges to support the law passed by Congress last year.

It passed the law against TikTok with both Democratic and Republican support — a moment that was the culmination of years of concern about the hugely popular platform, known for its viral videos and appeal among young people.

The order requires ByteDance to sell TikTok in the US or cease operations on January 19.

Justice Department lawyer Elizabeth Prylogar argued in court on Friday that ByteDance’s ties to the Chinese government make it a national security risk.

She told the court that Beijing “could use TikTok as a weapon at any time to harm the United States.”

It later said that a warning placed on TikTok for users would not be sufficient to address concerns about its ties with China, nor would it adequately address national security issues.

Toward the end of the hearing, Francisco sought to underscore the argument that “the government cannot restrict free speech in order to protect us from free speech.”

“And that is exactly what this law does from beginning to end.”

But his arguments came under intense scrutiny by the justices, who repeatedly returned to the national security concerns that gave rise to the law in the first place.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh looked into concerns raised by the US government about what data the app collects on its users and how that data is used.

He added that the risks associated with this appear to be a “major concern for the future of the country.”

In December, US President-elect Donald Trump She asked the court to postpone its decision So that he can return to the White House so that he can search for a “political solution” to resolve the issues at hand.

TikTok’s lawyer told the court on Friday that he believed the platform would “remain closed” on January 19 without intervention.

Ms Prelogar, defending the US Department of Justice, said “nothing permanent” should happen on that day, and there was still time for the sale.

She said forcing the app to go dark might be just the “shock” that ByteDance needs to seriously consider selling.

“This will fundamentally change the landscape in terms of what ByteDance might think,” she said, comparing the situation to a “game of chicken” in which the United States should not “blink first.”

The judges will now consider their decision. The ruling is expected to be issued in the coming days.

More than a hundred people braved the freezing conditions in Washington, D.C., to attend the session in person.

Danielle Ballesteros, a student at the University of California, San Diego, said she had been waiting outside the court since 06:30 local time.

“I feel like TikTok doesn’t deserve to be banned,” she told the BBC.

While she admitted to using it “maybe too much,” she said she believes the app is an important news source for her generation.

The legislation approved by Congress does not prohibit the use of the application, but it requires technology giants such as Apple and Google to stop offering it and prevent updates, which analysts indicate will eliminate it over time.

The US says TikTok poses a “serious” threat because the Chinese government could force its owner, ByteDance, to hand over user data or manipulate what it shows users to serve Chinese interests.

TikTok has repeatedly denied any potential Chinese Communist Party influence and said the law violates its users’ First Amendment free speech rights.

TikTok has already been banned on government devices in several countries, including the UK. It faces a more comprehensive ban in some countries, including India.

Last December, A A three-judge appeals court decision upheld the lawPointing to China’s record of working through private companies, he said the action was justified as “part of a broader effort to confront the well-substantiated national security threat posed” by the country.

Jeffrey L. Fisher, a Stanford law professor who represents the creators who sued, told the court on Friday that the country has historically faced “ideological campaigns by foreign adversaries.”

But he said that under the First Amendment, mere thoughts do not constitute a threat to national security.