Supreme Court’s TikTok Ruling Sets Dangerous Precedent for Free Speech

The Court upholds the TikTok ban.

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court announced its decision in TikTok, et al. v. Garland and Firebaugh, et al. v. Garland. The decision follows President Biden signing the “Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act (PAFACA)” into law last year. The law forces the divestment of designated social media platforms owned by foreign adversaries and currently only targets ByteDance’s TikTok. Unless the platform is divested, TikTok faces a ban in the United States by January 19, 2025. The Supreme Court determined the conditional ban does not violate the First Amendment. Public Knowledge previously filed an amicus brief in this case urging the Court to apply strict scrutiny and strike down the law over its infringement on free expression under the First Amendment.

The following can be attributed to Morgan Wilsmann, Policy Analyst at Public Knowledge:

“By accepting the government’s broad national security claims without requiring it to pursue less restrictive alternatives, the Court has given future administrations a roadmap to shut down any foreign-affiliated platform or media company they disfavor.

“There are real national security concerns relating to data collection. But if lawmakers truly cared about the safety of American data, they would pass a comprehensive privacy law and rein in data brokers who profit tremendously from harvesting and selling data to foreign actors without our knowledge.

“The flocking of TikTok users to RedNote, a Chinese owned platform, demonstrates that targeted bans are akin to futile whack-a-mole, simply redirecting user activity without addressing fundamental privacy concerns.

“If divestiture does proceed, we must ensure the cure isn’t worse than the disease. Allowing incumbents like X or Meta to acquire TikTok would concentrate even more power in the hands of a few dominant platforms that already control too much of our digital discourse. The real, concrete threat of further media consolidation poses far greater risks to democracy and free expression than the hypothetical national security concerns this law purports to address.”

You may view our amicus brief on this case for more information.

Members of the media may contact Communications Director Shiva Stella with inquiries, interview requests, or to join the Public Knowledge press list at shiva@publicknowledge.org or 405-249-9435.