The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously on Friday to uphold the U.S. marketing ban on TikTok, which is expected to be enacted this Sunday.
“We recognize that the cases before us involve new technologies with transformative capabilities. This challenging new situation calls for vigilance on our part. “,” the Supreme Court said. dominated on friday. “As Justice Frankfurter advised 80 years ago when considering applying established legal rules to the 'whole new problems' that airplanes and radios pose, we must 'prevent the future from embarrassing us. You should be careful not to.
The court continued: “TikTok users’ content feeds are also shaped by content moderation and filtering decisions. TikTok uses automated human processes to remove content that violates the platform’s community guidelines. Masu.”
“TikTok Inc.'s ultimate parent company is ByteDance Ltd., a privately held company with operations in China. ByteDance Ltd. owns TikTok's proprietary algorithm, which is developed and maintained in China. ', the court noted.
“ByteDance is subject to Chinese law that requires it to “support or cooperate'' with the Chinese government's “intelligence activities,'' and to ensure that the Chinese government has “authority to access and control personal data'' held by ByteDance. I will accept it.” The court added:
The justices also noted that U.S. lawmakers have repeatedly expressed national security concerns regarding TikTok's relationship with China.
“In August 2020, President Trump issued an executive order recognizing the fact that “mobile applications developed and owned by corporations are widespread in the United States.'' [China] “continues to threaten the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States,” the court said in Friday's ruling.
The court added that the records reflect China's “extensive and long-standing efforts to amass structured data sets, particularly on U.S. persons, in support of intelligence and counterintelligence operations.”
“We believe that this law has important implications for national security and foreign policy as it relates to efforts to confront evolving threats in regions where information is difficult to obtain and where the impact of particular actions is difficult to assess. I am mindful that it is occurring in circumstances that give rise to concerns,” the judge said. Said.
“Furthermore, as we have already concluded, the government had good reason to single out TikTok for special treatment,” the court continued, adding, “The validity of the challenged provisions is “This does not affect whether we agree with the government's next conclusion.” The regulatory path chosen is the best or “most appropriate” one. ”
“We are particularly wary of parsing Congress's motives based on this record regarding legislation passed with overwhelming bipartisan support,” the court noted.
As the court noted, Congress responded to this threat by enacting laws to protect Americans from foreign enemy control applications.
“There is no question that TikTok provides a unique and far-reaching source of expression, participation, and community for more than 170 million Americans,” the court said. “However, Congress has determined that the sale is necessary to address widely held national security concerns regarding TikTok's data collection practices and relationships with foreign adversaries.”
“For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that the challenged provisions do not violate appellant's First Amendment rights,” the Supreme Court asserted.
The court found that a de facto ban on the social media platform, which has 170 million users in the United States, “places a significant burden on the expressive activities of those users.”
“At the same time, laws targeting foreign enemy control of communications platforms are in many ways different in type from the regulation of non-expressive activities that has been subject to First Amendment scrutiny,” the justices wrote. .
“However, while we find that differential treatment was justified here, we emphasize that the holdings are narrow in nature. Data collection and analysis is common practice in this digital age. This is a serious act,” the court added. “However, given TikTok’s size and vulnerability to foreign enemy control, as well as the vast amount of sensitive data the platform collects, discriminatory treatment to address the government’s national security concerns is not justified. ”
The case is TikTok v. GarlandU.S. Supreme Court No. 24-656.
Alana Mastrangelo is a reporter for Breitbart News. you can follow her facebook And with X @ARmastrangeloand further Instagram.
