A federal judge scheduled a rare Sunday morning hearing to decide whether the U.S. can go through with its ban on the popular video-sharing app TikTok.
Trump cited national security risks in August, when he announced a ban on the widely-used network from U.S. app stores. The president, who’s also barred
The government emphasized those concerns in a filing on Friday, urging U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols not to grant the temporary block. U.S. lawyers cited FBI Director
Communist Party Ties
“One of the tools that the PRC uses to further its goals is bulk data collection,” the U.S. government said, referring to the People’s Republic of China.
ByteDance, founded in 2012 by
“In April 2018, the CCP forced ByteDance to shutdown one of its other platforms, and Mr. Yiming issued a public apology in which he pledged to cooperate with and elevate official CCP media,” the U.S. said. “Following this public atonement, ByteDance underwent organizational restructuring with CCP infrastructure now built into it.”
The
‘Security Risks’
Ahead of the looming deadline,
“TikTok is allowed to continue operating with respect to existing users but cannot add users, and the reason for that is that there are significant national security risks,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Daniel Schwei told the judge.
TikTok said that the ban was already undermining its business model by scaring users away, and that it had sought relief as soon as it was allowed to under the law. It said the government would have argued its request was premature if filed earlier.
“The urgency of this is created by the Sunday night ban,” attorney
User Risks
Hall added the ban would increase risks to existing users by preventing them from getting regular security updates. The deadline also was affecting the company’s reputation with users, who are considering moving to less attractive platforms, the attorney noted.
In the social media industry, Hall said, “users retained is absolutely the lifeblood of their business.”
In Friday’s filing, TikTok’s lawyers argued that Trump is exceeding his authority with the proposed ban and acting in an “unreasonable and capricious manner” by seeking to cut off all transactions on the service.
The law being invoked “states the President’s authority does not extend to the direct or indirect regulation or prohibition of ‘personal communication’ and the international flow of ‘information or informational materials,’ such as film, photographs, and artwork, regardless of the ‘format or medium of transmission,”’ the Chinese company’s lawyers argued.
Such a ban also would trample free-speech rights of U.S. users of the Chinese company’s platform, TikTok’s lawyers added. Millions of Americans “engage in core protected speech on TikTok in pursuit of a wide variety of political, social, and cultural ends,” according to the brief. “The Prohibitions unlawfully restrict this speech in violation of the First Amendment.”
The case is TikTok Inc. v. Trump, 20-cv-2658, U.S. District Court, District of Columbia (Washington).
(Updates with excerpts from TikTok filing starting in second paragraph)
--With assistance from
To contact the reporters on this story:
To contact the editors responsible for this story:
Tina Davis, Ros Krasny
© 2020 Bloomberg L.P. All rights reserved. Used with permission.
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
See Breaking News in Context
Bloomberg Law provides trusted coverage of current events enhanced with legal analysis.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools and resources.