The Supreme Court agreed on Wednesday to hear the dispute over the law requiring social media giant TikTok Inc. to divest its American subsidiary by Jan. 19, 2025, or face a ban in the United States.
The brief order set oral arguments in the case for Jan. 10, days before the law’s deadline. TikTok argues that the law places unconstitutional restrictions on the company that aren’t justified by arguments that its China-based owner, Bytedance Ltd., makes it vulnerable to foreign manipulation.
Wednesday’s unsigned order sets up a single issue for the justices to decide: whether the divestiture law passed by Congress violates the First Amendment rights of the company and its users.
The order also set up a briefing schedule for the case, with both sides’ main briefs due on Dec. 27 and reply briefs due on Jan. 3, ahead of the two-hour court showdown on Jan. 10 that will determine the fate of the company in the U.S.
The order comes days after Tiktok and its users asked the justices to pause a decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit earlier this month upholding the law. The three-judge appellate panel ruled that the law was justified to protect U.S. interests in preventing interference from a foreign power.
TikTok has argued that the Constitution should not allow Congress to target one of the largest speech platforms in the U.S.
“Congress’s unprecedented attempt to single out Applicants and bar them from operating one of the most significant speech platforms in this Nation presents grave constitutional problems that this Court likely will not allow to stand,” the company argued in its application Monday.
Wednesday’s order did not rule either way on the emergency application from TikTok, leaving the justices just days to decide the case between the oral arguments and the law’s deadline.
The law at issue, passed by Congress earlier this year, mandates that TikTok sell its American subsidiary or face a ban in the U.S. The Biden administration and some lawmakers argue that the Chinese government could gain access to troves of data the social media company collects from users, or could mandate manipulation of the company’s algorithm.
The company argues the law violates its First Amendment rights by targeting speech the government disfavors. The company has cited statements from members of Congress raising concerns about the prevalence of certain views on the platform, such as support for Palestine.
TikTok has also disputed the government’s characterization of the risks, saying that the app does not collect as much data as the Biden administration claims and the data it does collect is stored in the U.S.
The post Supreme Court agrees to hear dispute over TikTok divestiture law appeared first on Roll Call.
