After TikTok’s lawyers faced a skeptical reception at the Supreme Court on Friday, the platform’s future in the U.S. appears uncertain. Should the Supreme Court uphold the law signed by President Joe Biden in April, TikTok will be required to divest from its Chinese ownership and sell to a U.S. company, potentially leading to a shutdown on Jan. 19, just before Donald Trump’s presidency begins. However, if the law is deemed unconstitutional, TikTok could remain operational for its 170 million American users.
The outcome of Friday’s oral arguments cast doubt on the latter scenario, leaving few clear pathways ahead. TikTok has requested an extension for the Supreme Court’s decision, a move supported by Trump through an amicus brief filed in December, advocating for a delay that would align the sale deadline with his presidency. This extension could offer an opportunity for a “political resolution” regarding TikTok’s future, though the specifics remain unclear.
One potential option Trump may pursue is a 90-day extension to allow TikTok to continue seeking an American buyer, as stipulated in the law. However, TikTok’s Chinese parent company, ByteDance, has expressed reluctance to approve a sale. Nevertheless, U.S. buyers, such as Frank McCourt, have shown interest in acquiring TikTok.
Gautam Hans, a law professor at Cornell University, expressed skepticism about the Supreme Court siding with TikTok and highlighted the unprecedented nature of Trump’s involvement in the case. He pointed out that Trump’s potential strategies, like pressuring Congress to rescind the law or directing the Justice Department not to enforce it, face significant challenges.
Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar suggested that ByteDance might reconsider selling the company if the law stands, potentially leading to a shift in the company’s stance. Rita McGrath, from Columbia Business School, noted that buyers like McCourt are banking on TikTok eventually opting to sell to a U.S. entity if no other alternatives emerge.
“It looks like a sale is on the table, which could potentially open up a new realm of negotiation possibilities,” McGrath remarked. “TikTok has refrained from exploring potential buyers or alternative solutions since the legislation was enacted up to the recent court proceedings. Instead, they have focused on lobbying efforts and charm offensives. This appears to be a last-ditch effort on their part.”
McGrath expressed confidence that creators would be able to pivot to other platforms regardless of whether TikTok is sold or not. Competitors such as Meta with Instagram Reels and Google with YouTube Shorts stand to gain an edge in the short-form video market should TikTok vanish. Nevertheless, McGrath acknowledged that the departure of TikTok would represent a setback for individuals who have cultivated substantial, lucrative, and influential followings on the platform.
“The users have genuine stakes in this situation. They utilize the platform for communication, content sharing, discussions, and revenue generation. The potential shutdown will have significant social, political, and economic ramifications for these individuals, beyond just the impact on the company,” Hans stated. “This presents a significant challenge from a First Amendment standpoint, given the rights and interests of the users, particularly when considering the over 170 million users in the U.S. who will be impacted in ways that won’t have easy remedies.”
