Karah Rucker
WE ARE EXACTLY ONE MONTH AWAY FROM ORAL ARGUMENTS BEGINNING IN A HIGH-PROFILE CASE –
IT’S TIKTOK VERSUS THE UNITED STATES.
THE SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANY SAYS A U.S. LAW PASSED THIS SUMMER IS “UNCONSTITUTIONAL” –
BANNING THE APP FROM OPERATING IN THE U.S. **UNLESS IT CUTS TIES WITH CHINESE PARENT COMPANY BYTEDANCE
THE U.S. CALLING IT A NATIONAL SECURITY CONCERN.
TIKTOK IS CALLING IT A VIOLATION OF THEIR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS.
LAST MONTH, THE U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT ARGUED IN A LEGAL BRIEF THAT
BYTEDANCE, AND ITS AMERICAN SUBSIDIARY TIKTOK –
SHOULD NOT BE ENTITLED TO FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTIONS.
THE DOJ CLAIMS THIS IS BECAUSE THEY ARE “FOREIGN ORGANIZATIONS OPERATING ABROAD” OR OWNED BY ONE.
IN A NEW COURT FILING –
TIKTOK LAID OUT ITS REBUTTAL.
ARGUING –
TIKTOK’S U.S. ARM SHOULD NOT LOSE ITS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS SIMPLY BECAUSE ITS OWNED BY A FOREIGN ENTITY.
TIKTOK – COMPARING ITSELF TO PROMINENT NEWS OUTLETS THAT ARE ALSO FOREIGN-OWNED YET HAVE AN OPERATING BRANCH IN THE STATES.
LIKE POLITICO AND BUSINESS INSIDER, OWNED BY A GERMAN PUBLISHER. AND FORTUNE OWNED BY A BILLIONAIREIN THAILAND.
THEIR 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 ORAL ARGUMENTS BEGINNING SEPTEMBER 16TH –
THE DOJ IS ASKING THE COURT THAT CERTAIN EVIDENCE THEY PLAN TO BRING BE “SUBMITTED UNDER SEAL” –
CITING CLASSIFIED INFORMATION AT “TOP SECRET” LEVELS.
TIKTOK HAS OPPOSED THESE REQUESTS.
WANTING WHATEVER EVIDENCE AGAINST THEM – BE LEFT PUBLICLY IN SIGHT.
AS THINGS CURRENTLY STAND –
THE COMPANY HAS LESS THAN A YEAR TO FIND A NEW OWNER OR FACE A BAN IN THE U.S.
HEY THANKS FOR WATCHING OUR NEWS UPDATE.
FOR MORE STORIES THAT MATTER TO YOU.
DOWNLOAD THE STRAIGHT ARROW NEWS APP NOW.