In one month, the oral arguments in TikTok versus the United States are set to begin. The social media company argues that a U.S. law is unconstitutional. The law bans the app from operating in the U.S. unless it severs ties with its Chinese parent company, ByteDance.
The U.S. government cites national security concerns as the basis for this action. TikTok, however, contends that the law violates its First Amendment rights.
The U.S. Department of Justice argued last month in a legal brief around TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance. Officials said the company and its American subsidiary, TikTok, should not be entitled to First Amendment protections. The DOJ claims this is because the companies are “foreign organizations operating abroad” or owned by one.
In a new court filing, TikTok presented its rebuttal. The company argues that its U.S. arm should not lose its constitutional rights simply because it is owned by a foreign entity.
TikTok compared itself to prominent news outlets that are also foreign-owned but operate in the U.S., such as Politico and Business Insider. These publications are owned by the German publisher Axel Springer SE. Fortune, another publication, is also owned by Thai businessman Chatchaval Jiaravanon.
The filing states, “American companies like Politico, Fortune, and Business Insider do not lose their First Amendment protections due to foreign ownership. There is no legal precedent for the government’s attempt to dramatically redefine protected speech.”
Ahead of the oral arguments scheduled to begin on Sept. 16, the DOJ has requested that certain evidence it plans to present be submitted under seal. Some information is cited at top secret levels. TikTok has opposed these requests, seeking to keep any evidence against the company publicly accessible.
As it stands, TikTok has less than a year to find a new owner or face a potential ban in the U.S.
