The Supreme Court was due to maintaining the TikTok ban because justice seems skeptical of free surface trials

Washington DC – The US Supreme Court probably seemed on Friday to uphold a law that would force TiktokS Chinese Owner bythage to sell the very popular video sharing platform or turn it off.

A majority of the conservative and liberal Judge On the bench of nine members seemed skeptical of arguments by a lawyer for tictoch such as forcing a sale was a violation of First amendment rights.

Signed by president Joe Biden In April The law adopted by congress Would block TikTok, which boasts 170 million American users, from US app stores and web hosting services unless replacement dance divests from the social media platform by January 19.

The US government claims that Tictok allows Beijing to collect data and spy on users and is a management to disseminate propaganda. China and prey dance strongly deny the claims.

“This case eventually comes to speech,” said Tiktok-Advocat Noel Francisco for two and a half hours of Oral arguments. “What we are talking about is ideas. If the first amendment means something, it means that the government cannot limit speech.”

Several of the fairies drove back and pointed to Tiktok’s Chinese ownership.

“There is a good reason to say that a foreign government, especially an opponent, does not have the rights for free speech in the United States,” said justice Samuel Alito. “Why would it all change if it was simply hidden under some form of striving company structure?”

Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Chief Justice John Roberts raised the national security problems behind the law – the protective Americans from the controlled applications for foreign opponents.

“I think Congress and the President were worried that China had access to millions of Americans, tens of millions of Americans, including teenagers, people in the 20th century,” Kavanaugh said.

Their concern, he added, was “that they would use that information over time to develop spies to transform people, into extortion people, people as a generation from now on will work in the FBI or CIA or in the Ministry of State.”

Roberts asked the lawyer for TikTok if the court is “supposed to ignore the fact that the ultimate parent is actually the subject of intelligence work for the Chinese government?”

Francisco said that Congress could have chosen other means to deal with its concerns such as demanding data from Tiktok’s US users must not be shared with anyone.

“We’re getting dark,” he said. “In essence, the platform is turned off.”

Justice Amy Coney Barrett raised the issue of Francisco’s characterization.

“You are constantly saying to turn off,” Barrett said. “The law does not say that TikTok has to turn off. It says replacement has to sell. If bythable disposal TikTok, we wouldn’t be here, right?”

General lawyer Elizabeth Prelogs, who represented the Biden administration, also raised national security problems and called the Chinese government’s control of Tiktok a “serious threat.”

“The Chinese government could at any time arms Tictok to harm the United States,” Prelogs said. “There is no protected first right of amendment for a foreign opponent to utilize its control over a speech platform.”

The potential ban can exert the relations between US and China just like Donald Trump Prepares to become black as president on January 20.

Trump, who has 14.7 million followers on TikTok, has appeared as An unlikely ally of the platform in a turn from its first term when the Republican leader tried to ban the app.

Trump’s lawyer, John Sauer, in a brief With the Supreme Court last month, which asked it to pause the law, “thus allow President Trump’s incoming administration to strive for a political solution to the issues on the matter.”