By Todd Feathers Published January 10, 2025 | Comments (0) | WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 10: (L-R) Sarah Baus of Charleston, S.C., holds a sign that reads "Keep TikTok" as she and other content creators Sallye Miley of Jackson, Mississippi, and Callie Goodwin of Columbia, S.C., stand outside the U.S. Supreme Court Building as the court hears oral arguments on whether to overturn or delay a law that could lead to a ban of TikTok in the U.S. Andrew Harnik/Getty Images Doom could be coming for scrolling after the Supreme Court heard arguments Friday on the constitutionality of a law that would force TikToks Chinese owners, ByteDance, to divest from the social media platform or see the app, which is used by roughly 170 million Americans, banned in the U.S. A ruling is expected before the laws January 19 divestment deadline and court watchers reported that the justices appeared skeptical of TikToks arguments. ByteDance and a group of TikTok creators already lost their case in a lower federal court last month, which set the stage for the last-gasp appeal to the Supreme Court. The case is about a bipartisan law passed by Congress and signed by President Joe Biden earlier this year that would prohibit the TikTok app from operating in the U.S. unless ByteDance relinquishes control over its U.S. subsidiary. Intelligence officials and lawmakers have been raising the alarm about TikToks ownership for years, arguing that the companys addictive algorithm operate as a propaganda machine for the Chinese government and that the data the app collects about users threatens U.S. national security.U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar pressed those points on Friday, saying that the Chinese government could weaponize TikTok at any time by using the vast amounts of sensitive data the app collects to blackmail Americans or by using its influence over ByteDances proprietary algorithm to secretly manipulate the platform to advance its geopolitical goals.TikToks attorney, Noel Francisco, argued that the law was directly targeted at suppressing certain ideas and content and would therefore violate the free speech rights of TikTok Inc. (the American subsidiary company). Furthermore, he said, Congress had not considered less-restrictive options to prevent the Chinese government from accessing the data TikTok collects about U.S. users. The law will essentially force TikTok to shut down, he said, because selling the platform will be extremely difficult and even if another entity purchased the U.S. subsidiary it would not be able to use ByteDances proprietary recommendation algorithm that has made TikTok so popular. The case hinges on several core questions: Is a law prohibiting a publisher from being controlled by a foreign entity an impermissible restriction on protected speech? And if so, does Congress have a compelling enough national security argument for the law to survive the strict scrutiny standard the court has established for cases that pit national security against First Amendment protections? Throughout the two-and-a-half-hour hearing, Prelogar and several justices repeatedly pointed out that the law doesnt force TikTok to shut down. Under a new owner, the U.S. version of the app would be able to switch to a different recommendation algorithmeven one that promoted pro-Chinese contentso long as the Chinese government itself didnt have a backdoor into the application.While the justices could make a clear determination to uphold or overturn the law, they could also choose to place a temporary stay on the case in order to let President-elect Donald Trump negotiate a settlementsomething TikToks lawyers seemed happy to accept. Trump filed a brief with the court days before the hearing asking for such a delay.Daily NewsletterYou May Also Like By Todd Feathers Published January 6, 2025 By AJ Dellinger Published January 3, 2025 By AJ Dellinger Published December 31, 2024 By AJ Dellinger Published December 18, 2024 By Matt Novak Published December 16, 2024 By Matt Novak Published December 10, 2024