We don’t know exactly what they discussed, but the US President-elect says it was a “very good” call. Until we hear otherwise from the Supreme Court or President Joe Biden, the TikTok ban is set to take effect on January 19th — one day before Trump’s inauguration. “It is my expectation that we will solve many problems together, and starting immediately,” says Trump.
[Truth Social]
The Supreme Court’s site has added text saying it “may announce opinions” at 10AM ET tomorrow. I’m going to be furious if we don’t find out the fate of TikTok two days before the scheduled ban. I will also grudgingly respect the top-tier troll effort.
Everyone (including yes, The Verge) is watching for a Supreme Court decision on the TikTok ban today, but there’s another big oral argument being heard at 10AM ET: Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, which could reset a 21-year-old precedent effectively barring strict online age verification and decide the fate of numerous state laws. Audio, as usual, will be streamed on the Supreme Court site.
Tiffany Cianci was finishing a TikTok live stream to 70,000 people when we met in the elevator after a press conference. She was in good spirits even after camping out in her van outside the Supreme Court beginning at 2 AM. “I don’t see it as hopeless right now, and I don’t think that they’ve already decided,” she says. Creator and petitioner Tim Martin also feels “very excited and optimistic” after today’s oral arguments, saying their attorneys “did an incredible job.”
Legal writer Eric Goldman pens his expert take on the state of internet law going into the new year, including generative AI, online speech, and Section 230:
Section 230 is on the extinction watch list in 2025. I will be shocked if it survives to see 2026. If you don’t already have a Section 230 tattoo, now is probably not the time to get one.
The silver lining is that I have a “no monuments to the living” tattoo policy, so apparently it’s exactly the right time.
[Technology & Marketing Law Blog]
TikTok lawyer Noel Francisco comes back for a brief rebuttal, and he’s pushing the court to stay the law even without making a determination about whether TikTok could succeed. This, obviously, would push its enforcement into the domain of President-elect Donald Trump, who has promised to save the app.
Prelogar says the court shouldn’t buy the argument that TikTok hasn’t been given enough time to sell, pointing to Musk’s acquisition of Twitter as a sign of how quickly deals can go through.
In response to Justice Kavanaugh, Prelogar says Congress was clearly and “sincerely” motivated by data privacy concerns, and even if you discount the questions about propaganda and manipulation, that’s enough to make the law stand up. She says TikTok is totally off-base in claiming that motivation is “tainted” if the propaganda-related arguments don’t hold up.
Justice Kagan asks about a Supreme Court ruling that Americans have a right to receive foreign propaganda. “It was focused only on foreign adversary control,” Prelogar says of the TikTok divest-or-ban law. Therefore, she argues, that ruling’s precedent shouldn’t apply. Kagan seems to disagree — saying the concerns about covert content manipulation clearly appear to be about content.
