COUNTERPOINT: Defending TikTok defends the First Amendment

Shaun McCutcheon, InsideSources.com on Jan 9, 2025

Published in Op Eds

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

President-elect Donald Trump is no stranger to making bold statements. Many see his asking the Supreme Court to pause the looming TikTok ban to allow his administration to pursue a political resolution as another example of his fearlessness.

As someone who has long championed free speech and individual liberties, I applaud Trump’s recognition of the bigger picture. Yet, while this temporary stay is a step in the right direction, the Supreme Court must further strike down the law that brought us here.

TikTok’s uncertain fate illustrates a more significant battle over free speech in the digital age. With more than 150 million U.S. users, TikTok is not just a platform for viral dances and quirky trends; it’s a digital public square where ideas, stories and culture intersect. It is a destination that political leaders use themselves!

The law, which will force TikTok’s Chinese parent company, ByteDance, to divest its U.S. operations under the threat of a nationwide ban, is an assault on the First Amendment. It seeks to solve alleged national security concerns by silencing a platform that has become integral to American life. This overreach should alarm anyone who values freedom of expression.

The Biden administration’s argument that this law does not constitute a ban is disingenuous. ByteDance is facing an impossible choice to either sell under coercion or face the elimination of TikTok from app stores. Either outcome represents a scary and troubling precedent for government intervention. The mere threat of such a ban compromises the integrity of the marketplace of ideas.

Concerns over data privacy and potential foreign surveillance are valid. But let’s not pretend that banning TikTok would eliminate these risks. Data breaches and cyber vulnerabilities are common in the digital age, and they’re not confined to Chinese companies. Facebook, Google, and even the U.S. government have faced their share of security failures.

Coercive divestment is hardly a free-market solution. It is heavy-handed government intervention. If policymakers are serious about protecting Americans from foreign data exploitation, they should address systemic vulnerabilities rather than targeting a single platform.

This issue raises a crucial question about where we draw the line on government overreach. Giving the government power to regulate or eliminate platforms based on speculative threats sets a dangerous precedent. Today, it’s TikTok. Tomorrow, it could be any app or website contrary to those who hold political power.

By targeting TikTok, the government undermines the principle that free expression should thrive despite political or security challenges. For millions of users, it represents a voice and, for some, a good source of transparent income.

Trump’s call for a political resolution is a step in the right direction. However, the ultimate solution lies not in temporary stays or divestitures but in a complete rebuke of this law. The Supreme Court must uphold the First Amendment and ensure that TikTok’s users — and the broader digital ecosystem — are not subjected to arbitrary government interference.

The debate over TikTok also highlights the generational and cultural divides shaping our politics. Younger Americans have embraced TikTok as a space for self-expression and connection, while some older leaders view it with suspicion, dismissing its value as trivial. This disconnect underscores the importance of protecting platforms that empower emerging voices, especially when contributing ideas and perspectives that can be valuable to our society.

TikTok embodies the innovation and creativity that has always defined American progress. Its success story is of entrepreneurial spirit and technological ingenuity, values that transcend borders. To ban TikTok is to betray those ideals.

The Supreme Court has a unique opportunity to affirm its commitment to free speech by striking down this misguided law that brought us to this point. Doing so will send a clear message that America remains a beacon of liberty, even as we leave the digital information age and enter the era of intelligent networking. It’s time to rise above fears and focus on solutions that strengthen our principles.

As a staunch advocate for free speech, I urge the court to protect the digital rights of all Americans. The fight for TikTok is about the future of free speech. Let’s ensure our digital town squares remain open, vibrant, and free from unwarranted government interference. Anything less would be a disservice to the very freedoms we hold dear.

The First Amendment is not a suggestion, it is a cornerstone of our American republic.

_____

ABOUT THE WRITER

Shaun McCutcheon is a political activist and free speech champion. He won the 2014 Supreme Court case McCutcheon v. FEC. He wrote this for InsideSources.com.

_____