January 10, 2025<\/p>\n
3 min read<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
U.S. TikTok Ban Looms as Supreme Court Hears Arguments<\/p>\n
TikTok is on the clock: ByteDance, the app\u2019s China-based owner, must sell it by January 19 or face a ban<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
By Ben Guarino<\/a> edited by Dean Visser<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n Participants hold signs in support of TikTok outside the U.S. Capitol Building on March 13, 2024 in Washington, D.C.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Anna Moneymaker\/Getty Images<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n About 170 million people use TikTok in the U.S., but that number could abruptly plummet toward zero if a law signed by President Joe Biden goes into effect on January 19. The law forces a choice for ByteDance, the China-based company that owns TikTok: it must either sell the app to a non-Chinese company or face a ban. ByteDance has repeatedly said the app is not for sale.<\/p>\n Instead the company sued to keep the TikTok app available in the U.S.\u2014and that case has now made its way before the Supreme Court. In oral arguments on Friday, Noel Francisco, attorney for ByteDance\u2019s U.S. subsidiary TikTok, Inc., argued that the new law violates the First Amendment rights of that subsidiary, likening TikTok\u2019s curation algorithm to editorial discretion. U.S. solicitor general Elizabeth Prelogar, arguing on behalf of the nation\u2019s government, countered that China does not have a First Amendment right to manipulate content in the U.S. And she claimed that \u201cthe Chinese government could weaponize TikTok at any time to harm the United States.\u201d<\/p>\n The Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision within the next nine days.<\/p>\n If you’re enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing<\/a>. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.<\/p>\n Congress, which passed the TikTok law with bipartisan support, says China\u2019s influence over the platform poses a national security threat. The Department of Justice has raised concerns as well, including the potential collection of personal data from the app\u2019s millions of American users and the potential \u201ccovert manipulation<\/a>\u201d of its content. (Although there is evidence that ByteDance shared non-U.S. user data with China, the U.S. government has not provided direct proof that the company or its subsidiary have meddled with American users.)<\/p>\n If TikTok loses its case, \u201cas I understand it, we go dark,\u201d Francisco told the Supreme Court on Friday. Americans would no longer be able to download or update TikTok from Google\u2019s or Apple\u2019s app stores. Internet service providers, too, would face severe penalties if they permitted TikTok access to U.S. users.<\/p>\n Americans may react in similar ways as former TikTok users elsewhere. After India banned the app in 2020, users flocked to other forms of short-form video, such as Instagram reels and YouTube Shorts<\/a>. It is also possible to access blocked content via virtual private networks<\/a>, or VPNs, which could disguise traffic to make it appear to originate from a country where TikTok wasn\u2019t banned.<\/p>\n President-elect Donald Trump, meanwhile, has asked the Supreme Court to delay interpreting the law until he takes office. An amicus brief filed on his behalf claims his \u201cconsummate dealmaking expertise\u201d could save the platform while addressing the national security concerns. Last September Trump promised to save the app, posting on his social media network Truth Social, \u201cFOR ALL OF THOSE THAT WANT TO SAVE TIK TOK IN AMERICA, VOTE TRUMP!\u201d Legal scholars have criticized<\/a> Trump\u2019s request for a delay.<\/p>\n Civil liberties and free speech organizations oppose the ban, contending that it violates Americans\u2019 rights under the First Amendment. \u201cRestricting citizens\u2019 access to foreign media is a practice that has long been associated with the world\u2019s most repressive regimes, and it would be deeply unfortunate if the Supreme Court let this practice take root here,\u201d said Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute, in a news release issued by the institute on Thursday.<\/p>\n Some free speech experts have argued that such a TikTok ban is more about political posturing than protecting users. Such a move does little to stop data brokers from selling U.S. users\u2019 information, whether to overseas tech companies or intermediaries who, in turn, can sell it to foreign governments. \u201cBanning access to one application does not create safety or security for Americans\u2019 data from China or from any other country,\u201d said Kate Ruane<\/a>, an attorney at the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), a nonprofit civil rights organization, in an interview with Scientific American<\/i><\/a> last year.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n![\"TikTok](\"https:\/\/static.scientificamerican.com\/dam\/m\/245c8eceff57a469\/original\/TikTok-supporters.jpg?m=1736541257.905&w=600\")
On supporting science journalism<\/h2>\n
Why is the clock ticking for TikTok?<\/b><\/h2>\n
What might happen?<\/b><\/h2>\n
Is the possible TikTok ban legal? Is it security theater?<\/b><\/h2>\n