TikTok is intensifying its legal battle against the U.S. government’s efforts to force a sale or ban of the popular social media platform. In a recent court filing, TikTok’s legal team argued that their platform should be granted First Amendment protections, despite its ownership by the Chinese company ByteDance. They compared TikTok’s situation to prominent American media outlets owned by foreign entities, such as Politico and Business Insider.
Last month, the Justice Department filed a brief in a Washington federal appeals court asserting that TikTok, owned by the China-based ByteDance, does not qualify for First Amendment protections. The department argued that ByteDance and its subsidiaries, including TikTok Ltd. and TikTok Inc., are foreign entities operating abroad and thus outside the scope of constitutional protections afforded to American media organizations.
In response, TikTok’s attorneys argued that the platform’s U.S. operations should not forfeit its constitutional rights simply because of its foreign ownership. They drew parallels with well-known American news organizations like Politico and Business Insider, which are owned by the German publisher Axel Springer SE, and Fortune, a business magazine owned by Thai businessman Chatchaval Jiaravanon. TikTok’s legal team contends that these foreign-owned media entities retain First Amendment protections, and similarly, TikTok’s U.S. operations should not be deprived of these rights.
“Surely the American companies that publish Politico, Fortune, and Business Insider do not lose First Amendment protection because they have foreign ownership,” TikTok’s attorneys argued. They criticized what they described as the Justice Department’s “dramatic rewriting” of the protections for free speech.
In a previous redacted court filing, the Justice Department had argued that ByteDance and TikTok had not demonstrated valid free speech claims in their challenge to the federal law. The government maintained that the law, which mandates ByteDance to divest TikTok or face a ban, addresses national security concerns related to the app’s ownership rather than targeting protected speech.
The Biden administration and TikTok have engaged in negotiations aimed at addressing the government’s national security concerns, but these talks have not resulted in a resolution. TikTok reported that the government walked away from the negotiating table after the company proposed a detailed 90-page agreement outlining measures to address concerns while maintaining its relationship with ByteDance.
The Justice Department, however, has criticized TikTok’s proposal for failing to establish a sufficient separation between its U.S. operations and China, and for not adequately addressing the government’s security concerns.
As the legal battle continues, TikTok remains steadfast in its defense of its First Amendment rights, arguing that its U.S. operations should not be subject to unconstitutional constraints simply due to its foreign ownership.
