TikTok is getting closer to a potential ban in the United States. So what’s next?

TikTok’s future in the United States appeared uncertain Friday after a federal appeals court rejected a legal challenge to a law that requires the social media platform to sever ties with its China-based parent company or be banned by mid-January.

A three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit unanimously ruled that the law withstood constitutional scrutiny, rejecting the two companies’ arguments that the law violated their rights and those of TikTok users in the United States.

The government has said it wants ByteDance, TikTok’s parent company, to divest its stakes. But if it doesn’t and the platform disappears, it would have a seismic impact on the lives of content creators who rely on the platform for their income as well as those of users who use it for entertainment and entertainment. connect.

Here are some details about the decision and what could happen next:

In their lawsuit, TikTok and ByteDance, which is also a plaintiff in the case, challenged the law on various fronts, arguing in part that the law violates the First Amendment and is an unconstitutional bill that unfairly targets the two companies. . .

But the court sided with Justice Department lawyers, who said the government was trying to address national security concerns and the way it chose to do so did not violate the constitution.

The Justice Department argued in court that TikTok posed a national security risk because of its ties to China. Officials say Chinese authorities can force ByteDance to provide information about TikTok’s U.S. customers or use the platform to disseminate or remove information. However, the United States has not publicly provided examples of such cases.

The appeals court ruling, written by Justice Douglas Ginsburg, said the law was “carefully crafted to address only control by a foreign adversary.” The justices also rejected the claim that the law constituted an illegal bill or taking of property in violation of the Fifth Amendment. Additionally, Ginsburg wrote that the law did not violate the First Amendment because the government did not seek to “remove content or require a certain mixing of content” on TikTok.

TikTok and ByteDance are expected to appeal the case to the Supreme Court, but it is unclear whether the court will take up the case.

TikTok said in a statement Friday that the two companies were preparing to take their case to the high court, saying the Supreme Court has “an established track record of protecting Americans’ right to free speech.”

“We hope they will do just that on this important constitutional issue,” a company spokesperson said.

Alan Morrison, a professor at George Washington University Law School, said he expects the Supreme Court to take up the case because of the novelty of the issues raised in the lawsuit. If that happens, lawyers for both companies still need to convince the court to grant them an emergency stay that will prevent the government from enforcing the Jan. 19 divestment deadline stipulated in the law, Morrison said.

Such a move could prolong the process until the judges render a decision.

Tiffany Cianci, a TikTok content creator who has supported the platform, said she was not shocked by the outcome of the court’s ruling Friday because lower courts typically defer to the executive branch on this type of decision. ‘business. She thinks the company will have a stronger argument before the Supreme Court.

“I think the next steps are more likely to produce a victory for TikTokers and for TikTok as a whole,” Cianci said.

Another wild card is President-elect Donald Trump, who tried to ban TikTok during his first term but said during the recent presidential campaign that he was now. against such action.

The Trump transition team has not provided details on how Trump plans to fulfill his promise to “save TikTok.” But spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said in a statement last month that he plans to “keep” his campaign promises.

After Trump takes office on January 20, it would be up to his Justice Department to enforce the law and punish any potential violators. Sanctions would apply to any app stores that violate a ban on TikTok and internet hosting services that are barred from supporting it.

Some have speculated that Trump might direct his Justice Department to refrain from enforcing the law. But tech companies like Apple and Google, which offer the TikTok app on their app stores, should then have confidence that the administration won’t pursue them for any violations.

Craig Singleton, senior director of the China program at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said enforcement discretion — or executive orders — cannot override existing law, leaving Trump with “limited room for unilateral action “.

There are other things Trump could potentially do. He may invoke provisions of the law that allow the president to determine whether a sale or similar transaction frees TikTok from the control of a “foreign adversary.” Another option is to urge Congress to repeal the law. But that too would require the support of congressional Republicans who have overwhelmingly supported the perspective to take TikTok out of the hands of a Chinese company.

In a statement Friday, Republican John Moolenaar of Michigan, chairman of the House Select Committee on China, said he was “optimistic that President Trump will facilitate a U.S. takeover of TikTok” and will authorize its continued use in the United States.

ByteDance said he wouldn’t sell TikTok. And even if he wanted to, the sale of the proprietary algorithm that powers TikTok will likely be blocked by Chinese export controls that the country imposed in 2020.

This means that if TikTok is sold without the algorithm, it is likely that the buyer will only purchase a part of the platform that does not contain the technology that has made the app a cultural powerhouse.

However, some investors, including Former Trump Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and billionaire Frank McCourt, have expressed interest in buying it.

This week, a spokesperson for McCourt’s Project Liberty initiative, which aims to protect online privacy, said participants in their offering had made informal commitments of more than $20 billion in capital. The spokesperson did not reveal the identities of the participants.