President Donald Trump’s ban on TikTok was temporarily blocked by a federal judge, dealing a blow to the government in its confrontation with the popular Chinese-owned app that it says threatens national security.
US District Judge Carl Nichols issued a preliminary injunction against the ban on the widely used video-sharing network after an unusual hearing Sunday morning. The judge refused to grant a court order against the November deadline for a sale. TikTok’s owner, ByteDance Ltd., had requested suspension after the president ordered TikTok’s exit from US app stores, unless the company sold a stake in its US operations to a domestic buyer.
The ban, scheduled to take effect at 11:59 p.m. in New York, would have removed TikTok from app stores run by Apple Inc. and Google’s Android, the most widely used marketplaces for downloadable apps. People who don’t already have the app wouldn’t be able to get it, and those who already have it wouldn’t have access to the updates necessary to ensure its safe and smooth operation. TikTok is regularly used by 19 million Americans.
ByteDance is fighting the Trump administration in court even as it seeks approval for the sale of a stake in the US business to Oracle Corp. and Walmart Inc. Trump has called for a ban on TikTok and WeChat, owned by Tencent Holdings Ltd. from China. , arguing that the apps could give the Chinese government access to millions of Americans’ personal data. The bans are part of an increasingly tough line he has taken with Beijing as the elections approach.
Even as the TikTok sale is still awaiting final U.S. approval, two of China’s most prominent state-backed media spokespersons denounced the deal last week.
“What the United States has done to TikTok is almost the same as a gangster forcing an unreasonable and unfair business onto a legitimate company,” the China Daily wrote in an opinion piece on Wednesday. Hu Xijin, the influential editor-in-chief of the Party-run Global Times, tweeted that Beijing would likely not approve the current deal as it jeopardizes China’s national security.
A lawyer for TikTok told the judge in Sunday’s virtual hearing that the ban was irrational given that ByteDance is in talks to reach an agreement that the president himself has demanded.
“How does it make sense to enforce this app store ban tonight when there are ongoing negotiations that could make it unnecessary?” Attorney John Hall asked.
Hall said banning TikTok from U.S. app stores would undermine security by preventing existing users from receiving weekly security updates. She argued that the government has less costly alternatives, such as the sale of shares, to achieve its national security objectives. ByteDance says Trump is exceeding his authority with the ban.
“The consequences are immediately serious,” Hall told the judge. “It would be no different than the government closing the doors to a public forum, cordoning off that town square.”
His language echoed a ruling by a California judge suspending Trump’s WeChat ban last week, citing its effect on free speech and the irreparable damage the ban would do to the company.
Daniel Schwei, a lawyer for the Justice Department, responded that “the concern here is about the risk of data security and leaving the data vulnerable to the Chinese government. It is a threat today, it is a risk today, and therefore deserves to be addressed today. ”The US government decided last week to extend its deadline to allow for more discussions on the sale.
In a presentation on Friday, the United States cited FBI Director Christopher Wray’s assessment that China represents the “greatest long-term threat to our nation’s information and intellectual property.”
TikTok is “challenging a national security determination by the president, as well as the judgment of the secretary of commerce on what is necessary to mitigate such damage to national security,” Schwei told the judge. “And I think the court owes significant deference to that.”
In a separate case, a Pennsylvania federal judge rejected a request from TikTok users to stop the ban on Saturday, saying the consequences of the ban would not be severe enough for users to justify a court order temporarily blocking the ban. order while litigation continues. .
The case is TikTok Inc. v. Trump, 20-cv-2658, US District Court, District of Columbia (Washington).
.
