TikTok strongly fought back against the unconstitutionality of "ban if you don't sell".
Under the heavy pressure of the U.S. government, the controversial video-sharing platform TikTok finally showed its "sharp sword", tearing apart the "national security" camouflage of the "ban or not sell" bill, pointing out that it violated the spirit of the U.S. Constitution.
Pointing to the unconstitutionality is on the bow
On May 7, TikTok and its parent company, ByteDance, teamed up to file a 67-page complaint with an appeals court in Washington, D.C. The most egregious allegation in the shocking complaint is that the Act to Protect Americans from Foreign Adversaries Control of Applications, which went into effect at the end of March, flagrantly violates the right to free speech guaranteed by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Backed up by layers of legal argument, the complaint cites a landmark 1919 Supreme Court ruling: "The right to freedom of expression may be restricted and constrained only when there is a 'present danger of immediate evil.'" However, in their view, the TikTok platform does not pose any such "danger", and it is obviously untenable to say that there is a threat on the basis of a single mouth, and in fact even the congressional report is only a vague concern based on "speculation".
Blatantly wordplay cunning
In addition to the allegations of unconstitutionality, the complaint also lashes out at the bill's apparent suspicion of misappropriation and blatant deception in its wording. It clearly states: "Even the sponsors of the bill have to admit that this is actually a 'blanket ban' against TikTok, not a so-called mere 'regulation' of ownership." ”
In essence, this overbearing bill gives TikTok two "choices": either sell its business in the United States to local buyers by the end of 2024, or it will completely shut down and face the fate of being cut off. However, TikTok bluntly insisted in the complaint that from a commercial, technical and legal perspective, such a divestment of assets is "simply impossible".
The road to defending rights is arduous and long
Obviously, this road to defending rights is destined to be a long road full of thorns. However, judging from the high level of constitutional rights and the higher level of freedom of speech, the US Government's wanton judgment and suppression have long been untenable, and they are completely morally and legally worthless. We look forward to justice upholding the core values of the United States as a nation of free speech.
The firefight intensified
In addition to ruthlessly debunking the other party's "national security" pretext, TikTok further warned that if this ridiculous bill does succeed, "it will undoubtedly force 170 million active users to lose this unique communication platform". It will completely stifle a new and innovative form of "speech" and cause immeasurable damage to the right to information and freedom of expression enjoyed by the American people in the age of social media.
"If Congress can do that, it can also order any newspaper or website publisher to sell its distribution rights in order to evade the First Amendment." "This will have disastrous consequences for freedom of the press and expression," the complaint said. ”
Security concerns have been fully addressed
To further refute the other side's "national security" pretext, TikTok detailed in its complaint an "unprecedented" security move to dispel data and algorithmic concerns — a package known as the "Texas Plan." The program, which is costing more than $2 billion, includes:
Migrate all U.S. user data and host it with U.S. technology company Oracle Content recommendation algorithms are reviewed and supervised by a third-party agency to ensure their transparency and fairness Signed a 90-page draft regulatory agreement with the U.S. government that allows TikTok to be "suspended" in the event of a breach
Are these extremely sincere and constructive measures still unable to make the other side let go of the doubts in their hearts? Have the suspicions about Chinese companies' "national security" concerns been somehow turned into a "video game", intentional or not?
The core controversy is nothing new
The lawsuit documents conclude bluntly: "The real question is, what else does the U.S. government want? We haven't heard any clear answer to TikTok's efforts and the heavy price it has paid. ”
It is not difficult to see that the core controversy of this offensive and defensive war is actually nothing new, but it confirms the normality of technological monopoly and geopolitical game in this era. The difference is that this time the spearhead is directly aimed at an emerging social platform with hundreds of millions of loyal users around the world.
Wrestling still takes a long time
This offensive and defensive battle will also continue to test the wrestling between government and private forces. Is it the imprisoned hand that vainly tries to harm the right to freedom, or is it the force of society that pursues openness and inclusiveness that can finally sink and float in the sand? We'll see.
What do you think about this? Feel free to interact with me in the comment section!