Lawyers for TikTok and its Chinese parent company ByteDance warned during Supreme Court debate over a law that would force the sale of the short-video app or ban it in the United States: “If Congress could do the same to TikTok… If yes, then this can happen. Even after other companies.

The law, which was the subject of debate before nine judges on Friday, sets a January 19 deadline for ByteDance to sell the popular social media platform or face a ban on national security grounds. The companies have, at a minimum, sought to delay implementation of the law, which they say violates the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment protection against interference with free speech by the government.

Noel Francisco, representing TikTok and ByteDance, argued that the Supreme Court’s endorsement of this law could enable laws targeting other companies on a similar basis.

Francisco told the judges, “AMC movie theaters were owned by a Chinese company. Under this theory, Congress could order AMC movie theaters to censor any movie that Congress did not like or that Promoted any film the Congress wanted.”

The justices indicated through their questions during arguments that they were willing to uphold the law, although some expressed serious concerns about its First Amendment implications.

TikTok is a platform that is used by about 170 million people in the United States, which is almost half of the country’s population. Congress passed the measure last year with overwhelming bipartisan support, as lawmakers cited the risk of the Chinese government exploiting TikTok to spy on Americans and carry out covert influence operations.

Jeffrey Fischer, a lawyer representing TikTok content creators who has also challenged the law, said during arguments at the Supreme Court that Congress was focusing on TikTok with the measure, not major Chinese online retailers, including Teemu. But.

“Is Congress (that) really concerned about these dramatic risks, would it abandon an e-commerce site like Temu that is used by 70 million Americans?” Fischer asked. “It’s very curious why you’re singling out just TikTok and not other companies that have the data of millions of people, you know, in the process of engaging with those websites and equally, if The Chinese are available for control, if not more.”

Democratic President Joe Biden signed the measure into law and his administration is defending it in the case. The divestiture deadline comes just a day before Republican Donald Trump, who opposes the ban, is set to take office as Biden’s successor.

Solicitor General Elizabeth Preloger argued for the Biden administration in defense of the law, saying it was important that it take effect as scheduled on January 19 so that ByteDance could be forced to take action on the divestiture.

“Foreign adversaries do not willingly give up their control over this mass communications channel in the United States,” Preloger said.

“When pressure mounts, and these sanctions go into effect, I think it will fundamentally change the landscape that ByteDance may want to consider. And it may be just the blow that Congress was hoping the company would receive.” will really need to move forward with the disinvestment process,” Preloger said.

If the ban takes effect on Jan. 19, Apple, opens new tab , and Alphabet’s Google, opens new tab , will no longer be able to offer TikTok for download to new users, but existing users can still access the app. Are. The US government and TikTok agree that the app will deteriorate over time and eventually become unusable because the companies will not be able to provide supporting services.

The Supreme Court also debated whether it was appropriate to ban TikTok given the possibility that China might be using it for covert influence campaigns or propaganda purposes.