Writer: Simran Agarwal
Editor: Sofia Ung
04/28/24
TikTok took the world by storm, having over 1 billion active users per month by 2020. TikTok allows people to not only interact with others but has expanded as a media platform where consumers can learn, create, and produce content. However, in recent years, there has been an increasing concern regarding TikTok and its ties to China. Specifically, the Chinese government has been using this social media platform to spy on Americans in order to boost their influence by promoting specific content while banning other content.
Lawmakers finally made a breakthrough with the case, as a bill to ban TikTok was passed in the House on March 13 with an overwhelming majority in favor. The bill is now headed to the Senate where they will debate over the bill’s merits. Although President Biden has already voiced his support for the bill, the other members of the Senate have all stated that they will take their time to avoid jumping to conclusions. However, the bigger question remains: Is banning TikTok a violation of our First Amendment Rights?
Within Congress, opinions on this are very divided. Democratic Maxwell states that this bill is a “violation of people’s First Amendment Rights...TikTok is a place for people to express ideas” (NPR). Maxwell’s opinion revolves around the idea that TikTok is more than just a place to upload videos but a way to express ideas and free will. TikTok has created a platform where businesses, artists, and even politicians come together to promote their ideas and thoughts. However, on the opposing side is Democrat Krishnamoorthi, a co-author of the bill who stated, “There’s no First Amendment right to espionage, there’s no First Amendment right to harm our national security” (NPR).
When looking at precedent cases regarding bans on social media in conflict with the First Amendment, the 2015 case of Elonis v U.S. was the first time the Supreme Court agreed to hear a case regarding the constitutionality of potential threats and social media. This case was groundbreaking, as the decision created a path for government regulation on social media.As more social media platforms have emerged, the line of professionalism has become blurry.
Another case that is currently being heard by the Supreme Court is Murthy v. Missouri, in which Biden and his administration have been working to fight the false accusations spreading on social media regarding the pandemic and the 2020 elections. However, the justices on both sides of the case were wary of limiting communication on social media and granting the government more authority in regulating speech and expression.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit ruled that White House officials in fact did violate free speech when they attempted to coerce platforms to remove content relating to the pandemic and elections. Justice Alito argued that in filing this claim, "It's treating Facebook and these other platforms like they're subordinates. Would you do that to the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal or the Associated Press or any other big newspaper or wire service?" (ACLU).
While the case is still currently in review, the underlying question remains: Is Biden and his administration stifling free speech by monitoring what can or cannot be said on social media? In a similar manner, we can apply both Elonis and Murthy to the recent bill passed regarding TikTok. Social media and government intervention have always walked alongside a thin line, but Murthy can serve as a precedent that government intrusion on social media is a clear violation of the First Amendment.
Advocacy groups, such as the American Civil Liberties Union have spoken out, claiming that this bill is “censorship plain and simple.” They further argue that by passing this bill it jeopardizes our rights to free speech and expression. These are sentiments expressed by much of the public and are apparent within the justices of the Supreme Court as well. Opposition to the government has always been common, whether seen through social media or news outlets, and TikTok has shown to be no other exception. Kavanaugh himself noted that "platforms say no all the time to the government” (ACLU).
Kavanaugh’s statement is further backed by Representative Dan Bishop, a Republican from North Carolina who stated, “The proper relationship between the government and citizens in the United States is that the citizens decide what to be exposed to and what ideologies to embrace” (Washington Post). Both Kavanaugh and Representative Bishop assert that it is the people’s right to decide what platforms they should choose to engage with and what information they wish to consume. Americans have always been subject to information and news pertaining to other countries, and TikTok is no exception.
Representative Dan Crenshaw, however, a Republican from Texas countered Representative Bishop by claiming that, “You wouldn’t allow a radio tower owned by the Chinese to be put up right in the middle of Washington, D.C., and then allow it to just put out Chinese propaganda...the First Amendment does not give the Chinese Communist Party the right to American data or the right to manipulate the minds of Americans” (Washington Post). Representative Crenshaw along with many others continue to point out the concerns they have with Chinese media flowing through America without any constraints. He further claims that the First Amendment would not be violated as the bill would be countering Chinese media, and would not infringe upon the rights of Americans. However, with Representatives on both sides of their parties disagreeing, it remains to be seen whether the Senate will pass the bill as tensions about the First Amendment continue to arise.
References
ACLU slams House for latest plan to ban TikTok and stifle free speech. American Civil
Liberties Union. (2024, March 5). https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/aclu-slams-house-for-latest-plan-to-ban-tiktok-and-sti fle-free-speech#:~:text=The%20ACLU%20has%20repeatedly%20explained,And%20the %20courts%20have%20agreed.
CBS Interactive. (2024). When would a tiktok ban go into effect?. CBS News.
CBS Interactive. (2024, March 18). Supreme Court wary of restricting government contact
with social media platforms in Free speech case. CBS News. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-government-pressure-social-media-free-s peech/.
Walsh, D., & Allyn, B. (2024, March 13). Why the House voted to ban tiktok and what could
come next. NPR. https://www.npr.org/2024/03/13/1237501725/house-vote-tiktok-ban.
Comments