The TikTok lawsuit contends that the U.S. does not have the right data security standards under the forced divestment law

TikTok has been in talks with the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S., a panel that reviews investment for national security concerns, for the past five years. In its lawsuit, lawyers for TikTok say its proposed plan included giving the U.S. a “shut-down option” it could use if TikTok did not meet its data security standards.

The case is filed in the federal Court of Appeals in DC, which has exclusive jurisdiction over challenges to the forced divestment law. The creators have petitioned the court to stop it from being enforced.

The government needs to present some kind of evidence to justify the exceptional measure adopted through an exceptional procedure. First Amendment law does not mean shutting down a vibrant speech platform for nothing.

If there is a compelling government reason, and the solution is as narrow as possible, a ban on TikTok can be considered.

Ryan Calo is a professor at the University of Washington’s School of Law and he said that this is especially implausible because of TikTok’s good faith effort to address the government’s fears.

The app says it spent $2 billion on a plan to keep users’ data in the US out of Beijing.

Laws in China would compel ByteDance to turn over any requests for Americans’ data, but TikTok said it has never been asked for any information from the Chinese Community Party. While ByteDance staff have had access to U.S. user data, there is no public evidence of Chinese government officials attempting to obtain data on U.S. citizens.

Laycock Comments on China’s Communist Phenomenology: What does the government really want to tell us about the U.S. security threat?

Douglas Laycock, a constitutional law expert at the University of Virginia, said the government will likely try to make the case that this is a “content neutral” regulation of a business owned by a foreign adversary that poses a national security threat to the U.S., not a case about censoring speech.

While the government will try to make the legal case about security issues rather than free speech, it will be difficult to avoid the constitutional implications, experts said.

Blumenthal said that the Chinese Communists were trying to get into Americans’ heads by using TikTok, which is a gun aimed at their heads.

When asked what the most important unknown was in the case, Jameel Jaffar said the government’s claimed secret evidence.