The legal fight over the Montana Ban is being fought by the TikTok and Free Speech Groups

How Bad Can You Get By Using Social Networks? The Case of TikTok, WeChat, and the Montana Supreme Court

The ban in Montana wont take effect for a while, so federal lawmakers could make up for it. This is a signal that politicians have no problem with wiping a social network off Americans’ phones.

At least a few US judges have reached the same conclusion. In 2020, courts blocked then-president Donald Trump’s executive orders banning TikTok and the similarly Chinese-owned WeChat, concluding that the Trump administration hadn’t demonstrated a security risk worth shutting down users’ speech. These executive orders were reversed when President Joe Biden took office, so the cases never reached a final ruling — but so far, Chinese apps have fared better in court than the politicians trying to ban them.

Montana is the first legislature to impose a full ban on TikTok. Several states, including Montana, have passed restrictions on government-issued devices. Now, the ban will apply to more apps.

Many of these challenges have caused harm in the real world, but they have gained infamy because people were warned about them. When the FDA amplified the joke with a bulletin, it became more widespread and a viral joke. TikTok is also far from the only place where people encourage each other to do stupid things online. The First Amendment protects speech that you may find distasteful or dangerous.

Throwing objects at moving cars, taking excessive amounts of medication, lighting a mirror on fire, cooking chicken with hot wax and using oxygen deprivation to unconsciousness are some of the other things that have been done.

What does the law of attainder actually violate the First Amendment and the Constitution? A comment on the TikTok vs. Montana case

This has been debated for years, and the answer is still “nobody knows.” The introduction claims that TikTok gathers large amounts of information from its users, accessing data against their will to share with the People’s Republic of China. There is a strong argument that TikTok could offer such data. But we do not know if that is actually happening. Until new details are released, that won’t change.

NetChoice asserts that the bill of attainder is an unconstitutional regulation that punishes people without trial because they are accused of a crime. It also contends that the law violates the First Amendment, “restricting Americans’ ability to share and receive constitutionally-protected speech online.”

Ms. Krishnan thinks that it is likely that TikTok will commit to suing. “Because this is such a dramatic and unconstitutional incursion into the First Amendment rights of Americans, we are certainly thinking through the possibility of getting involved in some way.”

This is a big step towards a new type of internet, one where states are putting digital barriers in the name of safety and security. But the law also won’t kick in for months, if it comes into effect at all. Here’s what’s going on.

NetChoice, the group that counts TikTok as a member and has sued the state in the past to block tech companies from being targets, stated that the ban violated the Constitution. Krista Chavez said that NetChoice did not currently have plans to challenge the law.

Ramya Krishnan, a lawyer at the Knight First Amendment Institute, said that Americans had the right to access social media platforms of their choice. To justify a ban, Ms. Krishnan said, Montana would have to show that its privacy and security concerns were real and that they could not be addressed in narrower ways.