Quotes
It is a stunt, and we see no reason for TikTok or other companies to take actions in the next few days before the Trump administration takes office on Monday
White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said on Saturday Given the sheer fact of timing, this Administration recognizes that actions to implement the law simply must fall to the next Administration, which takes office on Monday,
White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement after the ruling Unless the Biden Administration immediately provides a definitive statement to satisfy the most critical service providers assuring non-enforcement, unfortunately TikTok will be forced to go dark on January 19,
I think that would be, certainly, an option that we look at. The 90-day extension is something that will be most likely done, because it's appropriate. You know, it's appropriate. We have to look at it carefully. It's a very big situation,
Trump said in the phone interview We have laid out our position clearly and straightforwardly: actions to implement this law will fall to the next administration. So TikTok and other companies should take up any concerns with them,
If I decide to do that, I'll probably announce it on Monday,
The Protecting Americans’ Data from Foreign Adversaries Act of 2024 … is entirely consistent with the First Amendment. The right to free speech enshrined in the First Amendment does not apply to a corporate agent of the Chinese Communist Party,
McConnell wrote in his argument The statements issued today by both the Biden White House and the Department of Justice have failed to provide the necessary clarity and assurance to the service providers that are integral to maintaining TikTok's availability to over 170 million Americans,
TikTok said in a statement Friday night We are fighting to protect the constitutional right to free speech for more than 170 million Americans who use TikTok every day.”
According to the TikTok CEO There is no doubt that, for more than 170 million Americans, TikTok offers a distinctive and expansive outlet for expression, means of engagement, and source of community. But Congress has determined that divestiture is necessary to address its well-supported national security concerns regarding TikTok's data collection practices and relationship with a foreign adversary,
the court said, reported CBS News We conclude that the challenged provisions do not violate the petitioners' First Amendment rights,
the court said, reported CBS News Okay, fine, I’ll buy it
The challenged provisions further an important government interest unrelated to the suppression of free expression and do not burden substantially more speech than necessary to further that interest,
Given just a handful of days after oral argument to issue an opinion, I cannot profess the kind of certainty I would like to have about the arguments and record before us. All I can say is that, at this time and under these constraints, the problem appears real and the response to it not unconstitutional,
We are grateful and pleased to have the support of a president who truly understands our platform — one who has used TikTok to express his own thoughts and perspectives, connecting with the world and generating more than 60 billion views of his content in the process."
We know a lot of things are up in the air, with the TikTok ban scheduled to go into effect this weekend,
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said Friday before the court’s decision TikTok should not be banned; it should be sold. China should not own it, but it should continue to exist in this country. The Supreme Court's decision opens the way for constructive efforts now to preserve TikTok, which everybody wants."
Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., a former state attorney general, added We have a few days to try to work this out, and let’s see where we land.”
Asked by NBC News on Wednesday what he would tell those millions of TikTok creators, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., simply replied The Senate had no hearings, no experts, no discussion,
Their First Amendment arguments are meritless and unsound. While the forced divesture may cause them irreparable harm, any delay caused by an injunction would be contrary to the public interest,
McConnell wrote in his brief
.jpg)
.jpg)
