Conservative figures and groups are standing in opposition to president-elect Donald Trump’s Friday request for the Supreme Court to pause the law that would ban TikTok next month if the social media app is not sold to an American buyer.
Chinese parent company ByteDance is compelled to divest TikTok by January 19, the day before Trump’s inauguration. If it cannot finalize a sale by then or by the 90-day extension if it’s triggered, the app will be banned from U.S. app stores.
Trump urged the Supreme Court to delay the TikTok divest-or-ban law, as the nine justices are scheduled to hear oral arguments in the case on January 10.
“President Trump takes no position on the underlying merits of this dispute,” Trump’s lawyer D. John Sauer wrote in an amicus brief supporting neither legal party. “Instead, he respectfully requests that the Court consider staying the Act’s deadline for divestment of January 19, 2025, while it considers the merits of this case, thus permitting President Trump’s incoming Administration the opportunity to pursue a political resolution of the questions at issue in the case.”
Though he tried banning the use of TikTok in the U.S. during his first term, Trump opposed Congress’s renewed efforts to ban the app. During his 2024 presidential campaign, the Republican vowed to “save” the platform from extinction in the country. With his newly filed bid, Trump is making do on that promise.
However, there has been a growing conservative backlash to Trump’s recent filing that represents his newfound amicable feelings toward TikTok.
For instance, the Republican attorneys general of Virginia, Montana, and 20 other states filed an amicus brief in support of upholding the TikTok law to sever Chinese Communist Party influence in the U.S. The document was filed on the same day that Trump brought his bid.
Bipartisan lawmakers on Capitol Hill passed the divest-or-ban law earlier this year over national security concerns, specifically relating to China’s efforts to undermine American interests.
Meanwhile, TikTok and its parent company have unsuccessfully argued that the looming ban infringes on their First Amendment rights. If shut down, the short-form video platform would lose over 170 million domestic users.
The 22-state coalition cites whistleblower reports and leaked documents showing ByteDance has shared sensitive information with the Chinese government, including American users’ facial recognition data and browsing habits. In contrast to Trump’s stance, the attorneys general hope the law will soon take effect.
“The Supreme Court now has the chance to affirm Congress’s authority to protect Americans from foreign threats while ensuring that the First Amendment doesn’t become a tool to defend foreign adversaries’ exploitative practices,” Virginia attorney general Jason Miyares said in a statement on Friday.
Advancing American Freedom, founded by former vice president Mike Pence, also weighed in on the case. The conservative political advocacy group, joined by many other organizations including Young America’s Foundation and National Review, asked the Supreme Court to uphold the law in an amicus brief filed last Monday.
The interested parties say the U.S. should ban TikTok, which Pence has described as “digital fentanyl,” given that NATO nations have placed restrictions on the platform. Notably, TikTok was never available for use in mainland China.
“Now is not the time to pause a ban/divestment of TikTok [sic]” because the app “is funneling intelligence and leverage to the CCP,” AAF president Tim Chapman posted on Saturday presumably in response to Trump’s urgent request.
Senator Rand Paul (R., Ky.) is one conservative lawmaker that has argued the law does not withstand First Amendment scrutiny. Joined by Senator Ed Markey (D., Mass.) and Representative Ro Khanna (D., Calif.), Paul advocated for “less restrictive” alternatives that address the federal government’s national-security concerns.
“History has shown time and time again that the government is too quick to prohibit speech when faced with the specter of foreign interference or security risks,” their amicus brief states. “That track record should cause this Court to view skeptically the government’s assertions here that national security demands speech prohibitions.”
It remains to be seen what action the Supreme Court will take immediately following oral arguments next month.
The justices could either affirm or reverse the decision made by a federal appeals court that twice dismissed TikTok and ByteDance’s efforts to delay the TikTok ban, South Texas College of Law Houston professor Josh Blackman recently wrote for Reason. Or the Court could grant a temporary injunction that allows enough time for the development of a fully written opinion.
If the Supreme Court doesn’t act before January 19, President Joe Biden would have a limited amount of time to decide whether to extend the compliance deadline. As the law stands, TikTok is slated to be banned in the U.S. by January 19.