外刊阅读20241223｜再见了，抖音。

+

上期划线句答案

+

本期内容

◆

双语阅读

TikTok has lost its bid to strike down a law that could result in the platform being banned in the United States. A US appeals court upheld the law in a ruling Friday. Denying TikTok’s argument that the law was unconstitutional, the judges found that the law does not “ contravene the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States,” nor does it “violate the Fifth Amendment guarantee of equal protection of the laws.” The ruling means that the platform is one step closer to facing a US ban — unless it can convince Chinese parent-company ByteDance to sell and find a buyer — starting on January 19, 2025. After the deadline, US app stores and internet services could face hefty fines for hosting TikTok if it is not sold. (Under the legislation, Biden may issue a one-time extension of the deadline.)

“The Supreme Court has an established historical record of protecting Americans’ right to free speech, and we expect they will do just that on this important constitutional issue,” said company spokesperson Michael Hughes. “Unfortunately, the TikTok ban was conceived and pushed through based upon inaccurate, flawed and hypothetical information, resulting in outright censorship of the American people. The TikTok ban, unless stopped, will silence the voices of over 170 million Americans here in the US and around the world on January 19th, 2025.” President Joe Biden signed a bill in April that requires the platform to be sold to a new, non-Chinese owner or be banned in the United States, following years of concern on Capitol Hill that ByteDance poses a national security risk.

The court’s ruling Friday largely deferred to Congress, finding that lawmakers acted within their constitutional powers and followed appropriate procedure in crafting the TikTok law. The legislation “narrowly” addressed the specific problem of TikTok’s China ties, the judges said, and “does not suppress content or require a certain mix of content.” Unimpressed with TikTok’s counterarguments, the judges dismissed the company’s objections to the US government’s national security concerns. TikTok only “ quibbles ” with how US officials have characterized its data practices, they said, and TikTok’s defense of its data collection “misses the forest for the trees.”

A key flashpoint in the case had been a proposed deal with US national security officials that TikTok claimed would have resolved the potential spying concerns. During the litigation , TikTok implied that the US government acted in bad faith by pursuing negotiations for months before suddenly cutting off communication and then backing the legislation that Biden ultimately signed. US government lawyers, meanwhile, responded that the draft deal was insufficient to resolve the security concerns.