US ban would also impact tens of millions of global users, TikTok claimed.
Credit: NurPhoto / Contributor | NurPhoto
TikTok is doing everything it can to delay a potential ban starting the day before Donald Trump takes office in January.
On Monday, TikTok filed an emergency motion requesting a temporary injunction on a US law that requires its owner, ByteDance, to sell off TikTok by January 19 or else be banned in the US due to national security concerns.
Planning to appeal to the Supreme Court to block the law on First Amendment grounds, TikTok urged the court to delay enforcing the law until SCOTUS has ample time to review the constitutionality of the law, which would impact millions of American speakers who use TikTok each month. TikTok also argued that Trump could "moot" SCOTUS review if he decides to "save" TikTok, as he promised on the campaign trail.
Winning this fight has become existential for TikTok. In a statement provided to Ars, TikTok's spokesperson said that "TikTok is, at its core, its 170 million American users." In the filing, TikTok alleged that these users would be irreparably harmed if the law is not enjoined, and TikTok could go down without them.
"Estimates show that small businesses on TikTok would lose more than $1 billion in revenue and creators would suffer almost $300 million in lost earnings in just one month unless the TikTok Ban is halted," TikTok's spokesperson said. In the same period, TikTok would lose about 29 percent of advertising revenue, the court filing said, after losing a third or more of users.
According to TikTok, granting the temporary injunction would ensure that TikTok and US businesses are not irreparably harmed by a temporary ban if either SCOTUS eventually strikes down the law or Trump decides against enforcing it. In the meantime, TikTok alleged, the US would face no "imminent threat" of harm, as the US has already "arbitrarily" dragged out implementation of the law by setting a 270-day deadline before enforcement.
The US is prepared to fight the injunction. In a letter, the US Justice Department argued that the court has already "definitively rejected petitioners’ constitutional claims" and no further briefing should be needed before rejecting the injunction.
If the court denies the injunction, TikTok plans to immediately ask SCOTUS for an injunction next. That's part of the reason why TikTok wants the lower court to grant the injunction—out of respect for the higher court.
"Unless this Court grants interim relief, the Supreme Court will be forced to resolve an emergency injunction application on this weighty constitutional question in mere weeks (and over the holidays, no less)," TikTok argued.
The DOJ, however, argued that's precisely why the court should quickly deny the injunction.
"An expedient decision by this Court denying petitioners’ motions, without awaiting the government’s response, would be appropriate to maximize the time available for the Supreme Court’s consideration of petitioners’ submissions," the DOJ's letter said.
TikTok has requested a decision on the injunction by December 16, and the government has agreed to file its response by Wednesday.
This is perhaps the most dire fight of TikTok's life. The social media company has warned that not only would a US ban impact US TikTok users, but also "tens of millions" of users globally whose service could be interrupted if TikTok has to cut off US users. And once TikTok loses those users, there's no telling if they'll ever come back, even if TikTok wins a dragged-out court battle.
For TikTok users, an injunction granted at this stage would offer a glimmer of hope that TikTok may survive as a preferred platform for free speech and irreplaceable source of income. But for TikTok, the injunction would likely be a stepping stone, as the fastest path to securing its future increasingly seems to be appealing to Trump.
"It would not be in the interest of anyone—not the parties, the public, or the courts—to have emergency Supreme Court litigation over the Act’s constitutionality, only for the new Administration to halt its enforcement mere days or weeks later," TikTok argued. "This Court should avoid that burdensome spectacle by granting an injunction that would allow Petitioners to seek further orderly review only if necessary."