Welcome to My Website

Thank you for visiting! If you don't see the pop-under, please click anywhere on the page.

Will The Supreme Court Pull The Plug? - adtechsolutions

Physical Address

304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124

Will The Supreme Court Pull The Plug?


The US Supreme Court has heard arguments Jan. 10 due to a law requiring ByteDance, TikTok’s Chinese parent company, to sell the app or face a US ban by Jan. 19.

Lawpassed last year, based on national security concerns about TikTok’s data practices and its ties to the Chinese government.

The case will decide the future of TikTok in the US, which has 170 million users and is a major platform for creators and businesses.

Government: TikTok is a security threat

The US government has alleged that TikTok gives the Chinese government potential access to sensitive user data and a platform for covert influence.

Chief State Attorney Elizabeta Prelogar said:

“TikTok’s massive data set would give the PRC a powerful tool for harassment, recruitment and espionage.”

Prelogar warned that China could use data collected from millions of Americans for blackmail or other purposes.

Referring to Chinese laws that require companies like ByteDance to share information with the government, Prelogar said:

“The Chinese government could use TikTok as a weapon at any time to harm the United States.”

Judge Brett Kavanaugh expressed this concern, saying:

“China accessed information on millions of Americans … including teenagers, people in their 20s.”

Kavanaugh warned that such data could be used to “develop spies, convert people, blackmail people.”

Chief Justice John Roberts emphasized that the law focuses on ByteDance’s ownership, not TikTok’s content.

Roberts stated:

“Congress doesn’t care what’s on TikTok… They say the Chinese need to stop controlling TikTok.”

TikTok: The law violates freedom of speech

TikTok’s legal team argued that the law violates the First Amendment by targeting his ability to work.

Attorney Noel Francisco compared TikTok’s algorithm to editorial decision-making, calling it protected speech.

Francisco said

“The real goal of government is actually speech itself.”

He adds:

“There is no evidence that TikTok is engaged in covert manipulation of content in this country.”

Francisco suggested alternatives, such as prohibiting TikTok from sharing user data with ByteDance or requiring user risk disclosures.

He argued that the measures would solve security problems without infringing on free speech.

Justice Neil Gorsuch questioned the government’s approach, asking:

“Isn’t that a rather paternalistic view? Don’t we usually assume that the best remedy for problematic speech is counter-speech?”

Are the alternatives feasible?

The judges also debated whether less drastic measures could work.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor questioned why Congress didn’t simply block TikTok from sharing data with ByteDance.

Sotomayor asks:

“If it’s about data security, why doesn’t Congress just ban TikTok from sharing sensitive user data with anyone?”

Prelogar countered that ByteDance’s control over TikTok’s underlying algorithm makes such measures ineffective.

Prelogar answered:

“There is no reasonable way to create a real firewall to prevent a US subsidiary from sharing data with the corporate parent.”

Prelogar explains that TikTok relies on the flow of data between the US and China.

Judge Amy Coney Barrett questioned whether TikTok could operate without ByteDance’s algorithm.

Barrett said:

“It seems to me like we’re saying to ByteDance, ‘We want to shut you up.'”

Barrett suggests that TikTok’s separation from ByteDance could fundamentally change the app.

What’s next?

If the law is followed and ByteDance is not released, TikTok could be banned in the US by January 19.

TikTok’s legal team warned that such a ban would set a dangerous precedent.

Francisco said:

“If the First Amendment means anything, it means that the government cannot restrict speech to protect us from speech.”

The government argues that the law is narrowly focused on security risks and does not target speech.

Prelogar said:

“The law leaves all that speech unrestricted once TikTok is freed from hostile foreign surveillance.”

The Supreme Court is expected to make a decision before the deadline. This decision could affect how foreign-owned technology platforms are treated in the US in the future.


Featured Image: bella1105/Shutterstock



Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *