TikTok and ByteDance challenge U.S. ban law in landmark lawsuit

TikTok and ByteDance found themselves in the spotlight on Tuesday as they initiated legal action against a recent American law targeting the popular video-sharing app within U.S. borders unless it undergoes acquisition by an approved buyer. The move, they argue, not only unfairly targets their platform but also represents an unprecedented attack on free speech rights.

In their legal clash,TikTok and ByteDance argues that the newly enacted law unjustly casts its ownership of TikTok as a national security threat, avoiding constitutional protections such as the First Amendment, despite the absence of any concrete evidence demonstrating such a threat. Furthermore, ByteDance asserts that the legislation is “obviously unconstitutional”, with its sponsors resorting to framing it as a mere attempt to regulate TikTok’s ownership in order to obscure its true implications.

ByteDance’s lawsuit paints a stark picture, alleging that “For the first time in history Congress has enacted a law that subjects a single, named speech platform to a permanent, nationwide ban, and bars every American from participating in a unique online community with more than 1 billion people worldwide”. This legal battle, unfolding in a Washington appeals court, underscores the pivotal intersection of technology, national security, and constitutional rights in the digital age.

The law, signed by President Joe Biden, represents a departure for the United States as it targets a social media company for a potential ban—a move critics liken to actions by repressive regimes such as those in Iran and China. The ensuing lawsuit adds another layer to the ongoing legal battle of TikTok’s future in the United States.

Under the law’s provisions, ByteDance is authorised to sell TikTok to a buyer approved by the United States within a nine-month timeframe. In certain instances where a sale is already under the way, the company is granted an additional three months to finalise the transaction. ByteDance has publicly stated its unwillingness to sell TikTok.

TikTok and ByteDance’s Dilemma: Regulatory Hurdles and Global Impact

However, even if it were inclined to do so, the company asserts that such a move would require approval from Beijing. According to the lawsuit, the Chinese government has stated its opposition to ByteDance including the algorithm that supports TikTok and ByteDance user feeds—an algorithm considered pivotal to the platform’s success in the United States.

TikTok and ByteDance argue that the new law leaves them with little option but to shutter operations by January 19 of the following year, stating a difficulty that continued operation in the U.S. would be neither commercially viable nor legally tenable. Moreover, they assert that selling the platform to subsidiary businesses in the U.S. TikTok platform as a standalone entity is unfeasible, given TikTok’s expansive global user base of one billion users, the majority of whom reside outside the United States. The lawsuit contends that a U.S.-only TikTok would be effectively isolated from the rest of the world.

Legal Battle and Political Backlash: TikTok and ByteDance’s Fight for Survival

This legal challenge highlights the technological complexities of divestment, with the law mandating the extraction of all of TikTok and ByteDance software code from ByteDance to sever any operational ties between the Chinese company and the new U.S. entity. TikTok and ByteDance asserts that their actions should be protected under the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of expression and are seeking a judgement affirming the law’s unconstitutionality. The Justice Department declined to comment on the lawsuit, while White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre witheld questions regarding the president’s use of TikTok for political activities to the campaign.

Representative Raja Krishnamoorthi, a Democrat from Illinois and ranking member of the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, released a statement on Tuesday supporting the new law. He said “This is the only way to address the national security threat posed by ByteDance’s ownership of apps like TikTok. Instead of continuing its deceptive tactics, it’s time for ByteDance to start the divestment process,” Krishnamoorthi emphasised the necessity of begin the divestment process rather than resorting to deceptive measures.

Meanwhile, Gus Hurwitz, a senior fellow at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School, suggested that ByteDance is likely to seek a temporary order to halt the law’s enforcement. Hurwitz noted that the decision on whether to grant such an order could be pivotal, as without it, ByteDance would be compelled to sell TikTok before the broader legal proceedings are concluded.

You might also be interested in – Chinese owner refuses to sell TikTok