A US federal appeals court on Friday set aside a mid-January deadline for a federal law requiring TikTok to be sold or banned to take effect, rejecting the company's request to halt enforcement of the law until the Supreme Court reviews his challenge.
Lawyers for TikTok and its China-based parent company ByteDance are expected to appeal to the Supreme Court.
It is unclear whether the nation's highest court will take up the case, although some legal experts have said they expect the justices to weigh in on the new types of questions. they talk about social media, national security and the First Amendment.
TikTok is also looking for a potential lifeline from president-elect Donald Trump, who promised to “save” the short-form video platform during the presidential campaign.
Lawyers for TikTok and ByteDance had sought the ban after a three-judge panel on the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit sided with the US government and rejected their challenge to the law.
The statute, which was signed by US President Joe Biden earlier this year, requires ByteDance to sell TikTok to an approved buyer or face a ban in the US due to national security concerns.
The US has said it sees TikTok as a national security threat because Chinese authorities could force ByteDance to hand over US user data or manipulate content on the platform in Beijing's interests. TikTok has denied these claims and has argued that the government's case rests on hypothetical future risks instead of proven facts.
In the request filed last week, lawyers for TikTok and ByteDance asked for a “slight delay” in implementing the law until the Supreme Court could to review the matter and that the incoming Trump administration could “confirm its position” on the matter.
If the law is not overturned, the two companies have said the popular app will shut down by January 19, just one day before Trump takes office again. More than 170 million American consumers would be affected, the companies have said.
The Justice Department had opposed TikTok's request for a stay, saying in a court filing last week that the parties had already proposed a schedule that was “designed for the very purpose” of allowing by the Supreme Court to review the law before it came into effect.
The appeals court issued its Dec. 6 ruling on the case according to that schedule, the Justice Department filing said.
Source link