Opinion | TikTok gets its day in court — the Supreme Court

On Friday, the court takes up a case that will decide the future of TikTok in the US. Trump has made an unusual attempt to influence the case.

An important case comes before the Supreme Court today: the future of TikTok.

The Associated Press’ Mark Sherman calls it “one of the most important cases of the social media age.” The New York Times’ Adam Liptak writes, “When the Supreme Court hears arguments on Friday over whether protecting national security requires TikTok to be sold or closed, the justices will be working in the shadow of three First Amendment precedents, all influenced by the climate of their times and by how much the justices trusted the government.”

So, yeah, it’s a big one.

The U.S government enacted a law that says ByteDance, the Chinese owner of TikTok, must sell the social media company or else TikTok will be banned in this country on Jan. 19. The U.S. fears the Chinese government could force ByteDance to hand over data that would compromise U.S. users. TikTok has said it has not shared U.S. data with the Chinese government and would never do so.

But the case has now reached the Supreme Court as TikTok argues forcing the app to shut down violates their First Amendment rights.

The Wall Street Journal’s Jacob Gershman and Sarah E. Needleman explain, “The new law doesn’t prohibit the use of TikTok, but it requires Apple and Google to remove TikTok from their app stores by that date. People who don’t already have TikTok on their phone or tablet won’t be able to download it from there. The law also bars U.S. internet hosting services and data-storage providers from supporting the app. Companies that defy the ban could face civil penalties that have the potential to reach billions of dollars. While the social-media app won’t suddenly vanish from Americans’ phones and tablets, experts in legal compliance and mobile-app technology say TikTok could still be usable in the short term and envision it dying a slow death with progressively eroding functionality.”

Then there’s the Donald Trump factor. The deadline on this matter is, as I mentioned, Jan. 19 — one day before Trump is sworn in as president.

Sherman writes for the AP, “Working on a tight deadline, the justices also have before them a plea from President-elect Donald Trump, who has dropped his earlier support for a ban, to give him and his new administration time to reach a ‘political resolution’ and avoid deciding the case. It’s unclear if the court will take the Republican president-elect’s views — a highly unusual attempt to influence a case — into account.”

And why does all this matter? Liptak explains it well: “The court’s decision will determine the fate of a powerful and pervasive cultural phenomenon that uses a sophisticated algorithm to feed a personalized array of short videos to its 170 million users in the United States. For many of them, and particularly younger ones, TikTok has become a leading source of information and entertainment.”

For more on this case, check out USA Today’s Maureen Groppe with “Why the Supreme Court is likely to side against 170 million TikTok users.” And why might the Supreme Court rule against TikTok? Because of those national security threats.

Also, check out The New York Times’ Sapna Maheshwari with “TikTok Stars and Marketers Brace for App’s Disappearance This Month.”

Correction

I don’t know where my head was while writing Thursday’s newsletter, but in the first reference, I messed up the name of USA Today Washington bureau chief Susan Page, who had an exclusive interview with President Joe Biden. I’m a huge ’70s TV fan, including “The Partridge Family” and I typed out Susan DAY (yes, I know it was Susan Dey, so I stumbled all the way around). Apologies to Susan Page.

More media news, tidbits and interesting links for your weekend review …

• Here’s the latest live coverage of the Southern California wildfires from the Los Angeles Times.
• Also from the L.A. Times, Connor Sheets with “‘This is our house’: Mom and son fought off Palisades fire with pump, hose and pool water.”
• The New York Times’ Nicholas Bogel-Burroughs and Mike Baker with “In the Palisades, an Evacuation Disaster Was Years in the Making.”
• MSNBC’s Katy Tur, who grew up in Pacific Palisades, with “What it feels like watching your childhood neighborhood burn to the ground.”
• ABC News’ Matt Gutman with a reporter’s notebook: “The apocalyptic destruction I witnessed in the Pacific Palisades fire.”
• From “Good Morning America,” Paris Hilton shares an emotional video on Instagram saying no one should have to watch their home burn to the ground on live television.
• Devastating photos of the wildfires’ damage from CNN.
• The Associated Press’ David Bauder with “No more fact-checking for Meta. How will this change media — and the pursuit of truth?”
• The International Fact-Checking Network at Poynter with “An open letter to Mark Zuckerberg from the world’s fact-checkers, nine years later.”
• In a guest essay for The New York Times, Julia Angwin with “This Is What It Looks Like When Mark Zuckerberg Runs Out of Ideas.”
• Mediaite’s Alex Griffing with “Another Exec Bowing to MAGA?’ HuffPo Editor Slams Parent Company CEO Over Looming Newsroom Cuts.”
• Politico’s Katelyn Fossett has a Q&A with Mouaz Moustafa, the executive director of the Syrian Emergency Task Force, a nonprofit established to respond to attacks on civilians by former dictator Bashar al-Assad in “He Went to Syria With Tulsi Gabbard. He Has Some Big Concerns.”
• Nieman Lab’s Joshua Benton with “That time Rupert Murdoch endorsed Jimmy Carter (no, really).”
• Tweet of the day from CNN contributor David Axelrod: “As I watched today’s funeral, I wondered how Trump processed all those tributes to Jimmy Carter’s honesty and integrity; his belief in the fellowship of man and the dignity and worth in every human being; his commitment to  human rights as a pillar of American foreign policy?”
• Nicole Stockdale has been named executive editor of The News & Observer in Raleigh, North Carolina, and The Herald-Sun in Durham. She replaces Bill Church, who left after three years last summer to become executive editor of the Santa Fe New Mexican. The News & Observer’s Richard Stradling has more.
• The Washington Post’s Ty Burr reviews the movie about ABC’s coverage of the attacks at the 1972 Munich Olympics: “‘September 5’: A gripping drama set at the ’72 Olympics.”
• And here’s The Atlantic’s Shirley Li with “When Crisis Coverage Became Irresistible.”
• Awful Announcing’s Ben Axelrod with “Longtime NFL reporter Jim Trotter casually reveals he’s retired.”

More resources for journalists

• Are you an up-and-coming newsroom manager? Apply by Feb. 14.
• Transform Local Crime Coverage in your newsroom. Application period ends Jan. 17.
• Cover critical issues surrounding child protection and the foster care system. Apply by Feb. 14.

Have feedback or a tip? Email Poynter senior media writer Tom Jones at tjones@poynter.org.