And that’s a wrap, folks! Stay tuned for incoming analysis on what this all means for TikTok’s future.
“If the First Amendment means anything,” it means that the government cannot restrict speech to protect Americans from speech, says Francisco, TikTok’s lawyer.
The court is adjourned. How do you think the two sides have fared in this oral argument?
TikTok pleads again that the court should issue a stay that avoids the immediate banning of TikTok on January 19.
Francisco names Temu and Shein again, and specifically mentions Temu’s massive Superbowl ad spending. TikTok is not going to go down without dragging the other two companies with them!
Rebuttal time! TikTok attorney Noel Francisco is back in front of the judges.
Prelogar cites how Elon Musk bought Twitter in less than six months, arguing there’s no reason TikTok couldn’t find a buyer in a similar amount of time. If I were her, I would be wary about bringing up Musk—he has significant business interests in China, and has been repeatedly criticized for his silence on political and human rights issues in the country.
Kavanaugh also brings up another important point: Even if Donald Trump decides not to enforce the law, service providers like Apple and Google might not want to risk violating the law by continuing to host TikTok on their app stores.
