The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has formally requested that the U.S. Supreme Court **halt the forthcoming ban on TikTok**, which is scheduled to be enacted in January.

“The Constitution sets an extraordinarily high standard for this type of mass censorship. The Supreme Court must address this pivotal case to safeguard the rights of millions of Americans to express themselves freely and connect with others globally,” remarked Patrick Toomey, deputy director of the ACLU’s National Security Project. The ACLU, in collaboration with the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, submitted an **amicus brief** imploring the Court to take action.

TikTok and its advocates contend that the ban contravenes the First Amendment’s protections of free speech. The company has steadfastly refuted claims that it shares the data of American users with the Chinese government, a central accusation driving the U.S. government’s efforts for TikTok’s enforced separation from its Chinese parent company, ByteDance.

If the Supreme Court does not intervene, the ban—**signed into law by President Biden in April**—is set to commence on **January 19**. TikTok could potentially sidestep the ban by divesting from ByteDance, but the company has thus far resisted this option. Earlier in the week, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals **denied TikTok’s motion for an emergency injunction** to postpone the ban until the Supreme Court reviews the matter. The Appeals Court asserted that the government’s measures satisfied the most stringent level of judicial scrutiny, referencing national security concerns as the rationale for the ban.

The ACLU and its affiliates strongly contest the Appeals Court’s rationale. “The D.C. Circuit inadequately addressed the law’s significant consequences for the First Amendment rights of the 170 million Americans utilizing TikTok,” the ACLU stated. “While the lower court’s verdict rightly acknowledged that the statute warrants First Amendment examination, it scarcely addressed users’ First Amendment interests in communicating, disseminating, and receiving information on the platform. The court also confusingly sought to frame the government’s ban on TikTok as a protection of users’ First Amendment rights, which it is not.”

The ACLU has persistently maintained that the TikTok ban encroaches upon federally safeguarded rights, including free speech. In a statement from March, the organization declared the forced divestiture of TikTok **”unconstitutional.”** A few months prior, the ACLU cautioned that banning any social media platform would signify **”a perilous act of censorship.”**

Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute, resonated with these apprehensions. “Limiting citizens’ access to foreign media is a tactic historically linked with oppressive regimes,” Jaffer wrote. “We should be extremely cautious about allowing this practice to establish a foothold here.”