WASHINGTON: TikTok made a last-ditch effort on Monday to continue operating in the United States, asking the Supreme Court to temporarily block a law intended to force ByteDance, its China-based parent company, to divest the short-video app by Jan. 19 or face a ban.
TikTok and ByteDance filed an emergency request to the justices for an injunction to halt the looming ban on the social media app used by about 170 million Americans while they appeal a lower court’s ruling that upheld the law. A group of US users of the app filed a similar request on Monday as well.
Congress passed the law in April. The Justice Department has said that as a Chinese company, TikTok poses “a national-security threat of immense depth and scale” because of its access to vast amounts of data on American users, from locations to private messages, and its ability to secretly manipulate content that Americans view on the app.
The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Washington on Dec. 6 rejected TikTok’s arguments that the law violates free speech protections under the US Constitution’s First Amendment.
In their filing to the Supreme Court, TikTok and ByteDance said that “if Americans, duly informed of the alleged risks of ‘covert’ content manipulation, choose to continue viewing content on TikTok with their eyes wide open, the First Amendment entrusts them with making that choice, free from the government’s censorship.”
“And if the D.C. Circuit’s contrary holding stands, then Congress will have free rein to ban any American from speaking simply by identifying some risk that the speech is influenced by a foreign entity,” they added.
The companies said that being shuttered for even one month would cause TikTok to lose about a third of its US users and undermine its ability to attract advertisers and recruit content creators and employee talent.
Calling itself one of the “most important speech platforms” used in the United States, TikTok has said that there is no imminent threat to US national security and that delaying enforcement of the law would allow the Supreme Court to consider the legality of the ban, and the incoming administration of President-elect Donald Trump to evaluate the law as well.
Trump, who unsuccessfully tried to ban TikTok during his first term in 2020, has reversed his stance and promised during the presidential race this year that he would try to save TikTok. Trump takes office on Jan. 20, the day after the TikTok deadline under the law.
The law would “shutter one of America’s most popular speech platforms the day before a presidential inauguration,” the companies said in their filing. “A federal law singling out and banning a speech platform used by half of Americans is extraordinary.”
Asked on Monday at a press conference what he would do to stop a ban on TikTok, Trump said that he has “a warm spot in my heart for TikTok” and that he would “take a look” at the matter.
The companies asked the Supreme Court to issue a decision on its request by Jan. 6 to allow, in the event it is rejected, for the “complex task of shutting down TikTok” in the United States and to coordinate with service providers by the deadline set under the law.
The dispute comes amid growing trade tensions between China and the United States, the world’s two biggest economies.

‘RIGOROUS SCRUTINY’

TikTok has denied that it has or ever would share US user data, accusing US lawmakers of advancing speculative concerns.
TikTok spokesperson Michael Hughes said after the filing that “we are asking the court to do what it has traditionally done in free speech cases: apply the most rigorous scrutiny to speech bans and conclude that it violates the First Amendment.”
In its ruling, the D.C. Circuit wrote, “The First Amendment exists to protect free speech in the United States. Here the government acted solely to protect that freedom from a foreign adversary nation and to limit that adversary’s ability to gather data on people in the United States.”
Without an injunction, the ban on TikTok would make the company far less valuable to ByteDance and its investors, and hurt businesses that depend on TikTok to drive their sales.
The law would bar providing certain services to TikTok and other foreign adversary-controlled apps including offering it through app stores such as Apple and Alphabet’s Google, effectively preventing its continued US use unless ByteDance divests TikTok by the deadline.
A ban could open the door to a future US crackdown on other foreign-owned apps. In 2020, Trump tried to ban WeChat, owned by Chinese company Tencent, but was blocked by the courts.

LONDON: CNN is aware an alleged Syrian detainee might have given a fake identity, and are “continuing to investigate” the background of the detainee who appeared in a recent controversial report featuring correspondent Clarissa Ward, following widespread accusations on social media that the segment — which shows Ward freeing the detainees allegedly discovered accident — was staged.

On the other hand a CNN spokesperson defended Ward’s work by saying that “No one other than the CNN team was aware of our plans to visit the prison building featured in our report that day. The events transpired as they appear in our film.” 

The footage, filmed on Dec. 12, shows Ward and her crew being led through a prison in Damascus by a man dressed in military clothing. Ward states that her crew were told to stop filming while their guide shot a lock to open a cell door. The video fades to black then resumes with the team entering a pristine-looking cell containing a single occupant.

The man, who identifies himself as “Adel Gharbal” from Homs, claims he has had no food or water for five days. He says he was arrested three months earlier after his phone was searched, yet he appears well-groomed and is dressed in clean clothes.

The report was greeted with skepticism online. Many people highlighted the spotless condition of the cell and the fact that the man seemed relatively clean and well.

Verify Sy, a Syrian fact-checking platform, later identified the prisoner as “Salama Mohammad Salama,” also known as Abu Hamza, a former first lieutenant in Syrian Air Force intelligence, who was reportedly imprisoned as a result of a dispute with a superior over extorted funds. It said he oversaw checkpoints in Homs and had participated in detentions, torture and extortion in the name of the Assad regime.

CNN told Arab News that Ward’s plan to visit the prison that day was known only internally by the broadcaster.

“The events transpired as they appear in our film. We reported the scene as it unfolded, including what the prisoner told us, with clear attribution. We have subsequently been investigating his background and are aware that he may have given a false identity,” said the spokesperson.

The decision to release the prisoner was made by the news crew’s guide, a member of a Syrian rebel faction, the spokesperson added.

Critics remain unconvinced, with Verify Sy questioning whether CNN had truly fallen victim to misinformation.

“As Syrians first and journalists second, we must ask: Did CNN deliberately mislead its audience to rehabilitate Abu Hamza’s image, or did it fall victim to misinformation?” the organization asked.

The report was also criticized for several questions it left unanswered, such as why the prison was apparently empty except for this one detainee, and why his behavior alternated between trembling fear and calm during the footage of his release.

Ward, who was in Damascus to search for American journalist Austin Tice, who went missing in Syria in 2012, has faced similar criticisms before.

During reports from Gaza, she was accused of exaggerating the danger after footage showed her ducking from supposed rocket fire while bystanders nearby appeared unaffected. And her claim that she was abducted in October by a militia in Darfur while covering the conflict in Sudan lacked corroborating evidence.

A community note with a link to Verify Sy’s findings has been added to CNN’s post promoting the prison video on social media platform X.

Syrian activists and civilians have described Ward’s reporting as disrespectful to the well-documented civil defense efforts in Syria, including those by the White Helmets, and harmful to the wider Syrian cause.