TikTok Inc. v. Garland

In TikTok Inc. v. Garland, the U.S. Supreme Court on January 17, 2025 upheld the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act. The law required ByteDance, TikTok's Chinese parent company, to divest its U.S. operations by January 19, 2025, or the app would be banned. TikTok and ByteDance argued the statute violated the First Amendment by singling out a specific platform and constituted an unconstitutional bill of attainder. The Court, in an unsigned per curiam opinion, held that the law survived heightened scrutiny because it was content-neutral and narrowly tailored to address national security risks posed by foreign adversary control of a platform used by 170 million Americans. Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Neil Gorsuch concurred in the judgment. The decision allowed the ban to take effect, briefly shutting down TikTok in the United States before President Trump ordered a delay.

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously upheld the law, ruling that the divest-or-ban requirement did not violate the First Amendment and was not a bill of attainder. The law was permitted to take effect on January 19, 2025.

Whether the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act violates the First Amendment free speech rights of TikTok and its users by compelling divestiture or banning the platform, and whether it constitutes an unconstitutional bill of attainder targeting TikTok.

The ruling set a major precedent allowing the U.S. government to restrict or ban foreign-owned social media platforms on national security grounds. It led to a brief nationwide shutdown of TikTok, affecting millions of users and creators, and triggered executive action delaying enforcement. The decision continues to shape debates over free speech, digital sovereignty, and U.S.-China technology rivalry.