Related: DC Circuit Upholds TikTok Ban In Alarming Ruling, Claiming It Actually Enhances Free Speech https://www.techdirt.com/2024/12/06/dc-circuit-upholds-tikt

Related: DC Circuit Upholds TikTok Ban In Alarming Ruling, Claiming It Actually Enhances Free Speech https://www.techdirt.com/2024/12/06/dc-circuit-upholds-tiktok-ban-in-alarming-ruling-claiming-it-actually-enhances-free-speech/ https://www.techdirt.com/2024/12/06/dc-circuit-upholds-tikto... > There is a fair bit of hand-waving, in which they note that the government presented no actual evidence of China doing anything nefarious with TikTok, but because government officials said “but they could!” that was enough. This sets an extremely low and dangerous bar. Mere speculation about what a foreign government might hypothetically do in the future should not be enough to override the First Amendment rights of millions of Americans. > In many ways, this is a continuation of the way the courts often view Fourth Amendment cases, where if the government just yells “national security” loud enough, courts will ignore the plain text of the Fourth Amendment. ... > The court’s reasoning here is Orwellian. It claims that banning TikTok, and the speech of millions of Americans on the platform, somehow enhances free speech. This is a complete inversion of First Amendment values. The First Amendment protects against government censorship and control of private speech, it doesn’t justify such censorship in the name of preventing foreign influence. The court is essentially arguing that violating the First Amendment is necessary to save it, which is absurd. ... > The ruling also rejects the idea that this was a Bill of Attainder, by saying that while it does “target” TikTok directly, its remedy is not a “punishment” and therefore that prohibition doesn’t apply. But banning TikTok from operating in the US unless it is sold certainly seems like a punishment. The court’s analysis on this point is not persuasive. > The court also claims that this bill is, in fact, the least restrictive means of achieving this outcome, rejecting ByteDance’s long-negotiated alternative of having all the data stored in the US on Oracle hardware, and giving Oracle the ability to audit the code. This plan was originally cooked up deliberately under the first Trump administration to support Trump donor Larry Ellison.