TikTok, Inc. v. Garland

Summary

TikTok Inc. and ByteDance, as well as a group of TikTok creators ("Creators"), filed a joint complaint in federal court challenging the constitutionality of a law that gives TikTok’s China-based parent company, ByteDance, up to nine months to sell the company or face a ban from app stores in the US. The Protecting Americans From Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act (H.R. 7521) passed Congress and was signed by the President in April 2024.

TikTok's complaint argues that the "qualified divestiture" required by the act is "not possible: not commercially, not technologically, not legally. And certainly not on the 270-day timeline required..." Moreover, the law is an "extraordinary and unconstitutional assertion of power" that "circumvent[s] the First Amendment by invoking national security." It also argues that in "contrast with past enactments that sought to regulate constitutionally protected activity, Congress enacted these extreme measures without a single legislative finding."

Updates

June 20, 2024. TikTok Inc. and Creators file brief of petitioners.

June 27, 2024. A group of constitutional law scholars, the Knight First Amendment Institute et al., the Electronic Frontier Foundation et al., and others file amici briefs in support of TikTok et al. or neither party.

July 26, 2024. US government's files respondent brief. Parts of the brief were redacted at the request of the government.

August 2, 2024. Former national security government officials, the Campaign for Uyghurs et al., a coalition of 21 states, and others file briefs in support of the US government.

August 15, 2024. TikTok Inc. and Creators file reply briefs.

September 16, 2024. The District of Columbia Court of Appeals hears oral arguments from TikTok Inc., Creators, and the US government.

December 6, 2024. The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia concluded that legislation requiring ByteDance to divest TikTok “survive[s] constitutional scrutiny."

December 9, 2024. TikTok filed an emergency motion with the Court of Appeals seeking an injunction pending the Supreme Court's review of the Court of Appeals decision.

December 11, 2024. Department of Justice filed a response to TikTok's emergency motion. DOJ argued "the schedule the parties jointly proposed was designed for the precise purpose of allowing orderly
Supreme Court review before the Act takes effect without such an injunction."

December 12, 2024. TikTok filed a reply in support of its emergency motion for injunction. Creators filed a reply in support of emergency motion for injunction.

December 13, 2024. The District of Columbia Court of Appeals denied TikTok's emergency motion for injunction. The decision provided that "petitioners have not identified any case in which a court, after rejecting a constitutional challenge to an Act of Congress, has enjoined the Act from going into effect while review is sought in the Supreme Court."

December 16, 2024. TikTok filed an emergency application for injunction with the Supreme Court.

December 17, 2024. Amicus briefs from Prof. Matthew Steilen; ACLU, EFF, and Knight First Amendment Institute; and FIRE, Institute for Justice and Reason Foundation filed in support of TikTok's application. Amicus brief from Senator Mitch McConnell filed in opposition to TikTok's application.

December 18, 2024. Supreme Court deferred application for injunction, but granted expedited review of the case. Opening and amicus briefs scheduled for December 27, 2024, and reply briefs for January 3, 2025. Oral argument scheduled for January 10, 2025.

January 10, 2024. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case.

January 17, 2025. The US Supreme Court upheld the Appeals Court decision, and the constitutionality of the law.

Additional Resources

TikTok Inc. v. Merrick Garland (24-1113) - CourtListener

TikTok, Inc. and ByteDance Ltd., Applicant v. Merrick B. Garland, Attorney General (No. 24-656) - Supreme Court of the United States