As the Supreme Court prepares to hear a pivotal case regarding TikTok’s future in the United States, President-elect Donald Trump has called for a postponement of the January 19 deadline requiring the app’s sale or an outright ban.
In a request filed by Trump’s solicitor general nominee, John Sauer, the incoming administration is seeking additional time to negotiate a resolution that could balance national security concerns with the platform’s continued availability in the U.S.
The filing positions Trump as uniquely qualified to broker a deal that satisfies all parties involved. “President-elect Trump alone possesses the consummate dealmaking expertise, the electoral mandate, and the political will to negotiate a resolution to save the platform,” Sauer’s brief asserts.
The request shows the administration’s intent to preserve TikTok’s operations while safeguarding the First Amendment rights of its millions of users.
At the center of the dispute is the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, signed into law by President Joe Biden in April as part of a $95 billion foreign aid package. This legislation mandates that TikTok’s Chinese parent company, ByteDance, divest its U.S. operations, citing national security risks stemming from its connections to the Chinese government.
What to know
TikTok, which counts over 170 million U.S. users, has contested the legislation, arguing that the forced sale violates free speech rights. However, the company’s request for an emergency stay of the deadline was denied earlier this month by a federal appeals court. The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments in the case on January 10.
In the brief, Sauer warns of the broader implications of banning a platform with such a significant user base, describing the potential decision as a precedent-setting moment.
“The power of a Western government to ban an entire social-media platform with more than 100 million users must be exercised with the utmost caution,” he wrote.
Sauer further expressed skepticism toward national security officials, accusing them of leveraging coercive tactics to influence social media content moderation.
“There is a concerning parallel between the unchecked deference afforded to national security officials and their documented role in pressuring social-media companies to censor disfavored speech,” Sauer argued.
The Biden administration has defended its stance, citing security concerns as justification for the ultimatum against TikTok. Trump, who initially sought to ban the app during his first term, reversed his position during his 2024 campaign, pledging to “save” the platform while addressing security issues.
With the January deadline looming, the case raises critical questions about the intersection of free speech, national security, and digital sovereignty, with the Supreme Court’s decision poised to shape the future of the U.S. tech landscape.
