Tiktok ban postponed by judge as national security concerns deemed ‘hypothetical’
The 'government’s own descriptions of the national security threat posed by the TikTok app are phrased in the hypothetical’, the judge said
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A federal judge has raised an injunction against the Trump administration’s ban on TikTok, stopping it from being banned in the country on 12 November.
The US government had repeatedly argued that TikTok is a national security concern due to its Chinese parent company and the claimed potential of Beijing using the app to harvest data.
TikTok has repeatedly denied such claims.
In this ruling, US district judge Wendy Beetlestone decided the Trump administration did not have enough evidence to ban the viral video app.
The “government’s own descriptions of the national security threat posed by the TikTok app are phrased in the hypothetical”, the judge said.
The ruling went on to say that the risk was not substantiated enough to be in the pubic interest, in comparison to the needs of its users.
Those users include a group of three TikTok creators, who brought the case to the court arguing that a ban would result in them losing access to sponsorship deals and other income.
These creators used the platform to spread “informational materials”, and as such banning the app would shut down their freedom of expression on the platform.
“We are deeply moved by the outpouring of support from our creators, who have worked to protect their rights to expression, their careers, and to help small businesses, particularly during the pandemic”, TikTok said in a statement.
“We stand behind our community as they share their voices, and we are committed to continuing to provide a home for them to do so."
TikTok’s lawyer, Ambika Kumar Doran, said that she was "pleased that the judge has halted this ban, which exceeds the President’s authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, namely portions of the Act that reflect our nation’s deep commitment to free speech,” in a prepared statement
Nevertheless, this ruling is only a preliminary injunction – meaning the app could still face a ban in the US at a later date.
However, it is unclear how such a ban would progress should Donald Trump lose the election to Democrat Joe Biden after the presidential election on 3 November.
Biden has said that TikTok is a “matter of genuine concern” and pledged to review security risks around the app.
This is not the only lawsuit facing the Trump administration over its TikTok ban.
In August 2020, TikTok said it would sue the US government over the potential ban, saying it had “no choice” but to challenge the order “to ensure that the rule of law prevails and that our company and users are treated fairly”.
The company could also work with Oracle which, along with Walmart, could acquire 20 per cent of TikTok, although it is not yet known whether such a structure would address the government’s national security concerns.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments