Outlets left, right, and center agreed: justices seemed skeptical of ByteDance's argument that the ban violates First Amendment rights.

The Case: A bipartisan law, signed in April 2024 by President Joe Biden, will ban TikTok in America on January 19th unless its Chinese parent company ByteDance sells the video platform to a U.S. company. On Friday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the company's petition for the court to pause the ban.

The Arguments: ByteDance counsel Noel Francisco argued the ban would suppress the constitutional speech of its American users, and Congress could have addressed concerns with a less heavy-handed measure. U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar countered that China's manipulation and surveillance through TikTok are a grave national security vulnerability, and that the option of selling it gives the platform a fair chance to operate in America.

Justices React: Justices Elena Kagan and Clarence Thomas noted the First Amendment doesn't apply to foreign companies. Chief Justice John Roberts quipped that if China's intention was to “get Americans to argue with each other... I’d say they’re winning!” Prelogar encountered pushback from some justices. Kagan pressed her on what qualifies algorithmic manipulation as “covert,” noting all algorithms like TikTok's are, by their nature, inscrutable. Justice Neil Gorsuch suggested a better “remedy for speech” is “counterspeech.”

How the Media Covered It: People (Lean Left bias) pointed out that China has its own bans on American platforms including Facebook, Google, and YouTube. Forbes (Center) mentioned ByteDance whistleblowers who said the Chinese government had threatened them and their family members. Fox News (Right) said the court's current roster has “been historically deferential to Congress on matters of national security.”