TikTok asserts that the United States' restriction on speech breaches the First Amendment's guarantee of free expression.

 TikTok asserts that the United States' restriction on speech breaches the First Amendment's guarantee of free expression.

The well-known video-sharing software also clarified why it cannot just sell itself.

TikTok asserts that the United States' restriction on speech breaches the First Amendment's guarantee of free expression.

In its opening brief, TikTok argues that the government's ban on the app infringes its First Amendment right to free speech and is fighting to stay in the United States. Additionally, it explains why it is "technologically, financially, and legally" impossible to split from ByteDance, the Chinese parent business.

TikTok's 99-page application, submitted to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals on Thursday, requests an examination of the legality of the Protecting Americans From Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act (PAFACA), a bill that President Joe Biden signed into law in April.

The bill names TikTok and ByteDance directly and puts a ban on "foreign adversary-controlled programs" in the United States. The corporations have persistently asserted their autonomy from the Chinese government and denied providing it with any information about Americans.

TikTok's lawsuit states, "Never before has Congress stifled so much expression in a single act." "The Act ought to be enjoined because it is unlawful."

American TikTok ban alleged to violate free expression rights

TikTok states in the complaint that laws limiting free speech are closely examined. According to this test, the United States government must demonstrate that the legislation is the least restrictive means of achieving its goal and that it is specifically designed to further a compelling governmental interest.

Essentially, when a surgical strike would do, the government cannot simply crush free expression to accomplish its objectives.

TikTok claims that Congress has not complied with this duty as, prior to enacting a bill banning the app, it did not take into account less restrictive options. TikTok purportedly signed a 90-page National Security Agreement with the US government, which included "multi-layered safeguards and enforcement procedures," as one of these alternatives. Project Texas, TikTok's $2 billion attempt to enclose the data of American users, was purportedly the company's attempt to begin executing certain aspects of the deal before it was finalized.

TikTok filed a filing stating that the Act "cannot bear First Amendment scrutiny at any phase of the analysis: it promotes no compelling interests, is not targeted, and disregards less restrictive alternatives."

"Congress does not appear to have taken into account TikTok Inc.'s long-term and elaborate efforts to allay official concerns regarding the platform's Chinese subsidiaries backing its privately held parent company. ByteDance Ltd. — worries that would also apply to many other Chinese businesses doing business in China."

In addition, TikTok expressed disapproval of PAFACA's "two-tiered system of speech restriction," alleging that it unjustly targets out the business. The lawsuit claims that the legislation imposes "one norm for TikTok and a different one for everyone else," noting that an app is immediately deemed to beIf TikTok or It is "managed by foreign opponents," under the direction of ByteDance."  

A judge declared the Montana ban unlawful last year after TikTok successfully contested it because it curtailed free expression and punished the company without a trial.

TikTok asserts that divesting is "infeasible."

The brief on Thursday also addressed arguments that the ban is not actually in place since ByteDance could just sell TikTok to a company that the US government supports. TikTok claims that it is almost impossible for them to complete this kind of divestment within the allotted period. Nine months after the bill was signed, on January 19 of next year, the prohibition is currently set to go into effect.

TikTok stated that it has "repeatedly" communicated this to the government. "Executing a 'qualified divestiture' is technologically, financially, and legally infeasible, particularly within the Act's timetable of 270 days (or 360 days with a discretionary extension)," the company noted. "The Act serves as a restriction as a result "

Even if it were feasible to remove TikTok from ByteDance, the briefing on Thursday asserted that doing so would leave the platform "a shadow of its former self" in the United States.

TikTok claims that the app is powered by "billions of lines of code," which are created and updated by thousands of workers worldwide. The company stated that because of the divestment, new developers would need to have sufficient training in the aforementioned code, which would probably take years. Moreover, TikTok makes use of proprietary ByteDance software tools, which the new law would forbid it from using once it was divested.

According to Thursday's briefing, even if divesting from ByteDance were feasible, it would turn TikTok into "a shell" in the United States. 

of the prior version." A TikTok that is exclusively accessible to Americans would need to be disconnected from all other users globally,  which would make it far less interesting and drastically lower its market value.

Lastly, TikTok said that the Chinese government will not permit a forced divestment of the app's recommendation system, therefore it is not legally able to seek a sale. 

The briefing states, "The Chinese government governs the transfer of innovations developed in China, just as the United States bans the export of U.S.-origin technologies (e.g., certain computer chips)." The United States has banned the supply of computer chips, including cutting-edge AI chips, to Chinese enterprises.

TikTok has been contacted by Mashable for comment.

We will not know the outcome of TikTok's legal case for some time. The current plan is for oral arguments to take place on September 16, three months before the ban is supposed to go into force.

The U.S. government's decision to prohibit TikTok comes after senators have expressed repeated concerns that the Chinese government is secretly monitoring users of the well-known app and altering its algorithm to present a positive image of China. To yet, no evidence has been made available to the public to support this theory. Senators have also charged TikTok with intentionally inciting young people to support Palestine to polarize American society.

PAFACA has the power to fine any American user of TikTok up to $5,000 if their challenge is unsuccessful. With 170 million users in the United States (which ironically includes both President Biden and former President Donald Trump), TikTok faces the possibility of a massive $850 billion fine if it decides to stay in business there. At $223 billion, ByteDance was valued in October of last year.