By Ann E. Marimow, Cristiano Lima-Strong · The Washington Post (c) 2025
The Supreme Court on Friday upheld a federal law that effectively bans TikTok in the United States on Sunday unless the wildly popular video-sharing app pulls off an unlikely, last-minute divestiture from Chinese ownership.
The unanimous decision was a major blow for TikTok, injecting deep uncertainty into the app’s future with the deadline to sell the platform just two days away. President-elect Donald Trump, who has vowed to use his power to “save” the app, will be sworn into office a day later.
No U.S. law has ever shut down a popular social media platform before, let alone one with more than 170 million users in the United States who rely on the app for news, entertainment and self-expression.
Trump had asked the Supreme Court to delay implementation of the law to give him an opportunity to act once he returns to the White House. With the court declining that option and no sale of the app seemingly imminent, the ban is now poised to take effect the day before Trump’s inauguration.
The court’s unsigned, 20-page decision said the ban-or-sale law does not violate the free speech rights of millions of TikTok users in the United States. The law was passed in April with bipartisan support and signed by President Joe Biden in response to national security concerns about the Chinese government’s potential influence over the platform.
The justices said the U.S. government was justified in singling out TikTok and its China-based parent company, ByteDance, writing that the app’s “scale and susceptibility to foreign adversary control, together with the vast swaths of sensitive data the platform collects, justify differential treatment.”
“There is no doubt that, for more than 170 million Americans, TikTok offers a distinctive and expansive outlet for expression, means of engagement, and source of community,” the opinion says. “But Congress has determined that divestiture is necessary to address its well-supported national security concerns regarding TikTok’s data collection practices and relationship with a foreign adversary.”
Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Neil M. Gorsuch wrote separately, agreeing with the court’s judgment about the constitutionality of the law but expressing some concerns.
In response to the court’s decision, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said that Biden believes “TikTok should remain available to Americans,” but under new ownership and that implementing the law “must fall to the next Administration.”
Trump, who said Friday he discussed TikTok with Chinese President Xi Jinping, said in a social media post that the court’s decision was expected and “everyone must respect it.” His decision about the app’s fate, he added, “will be made in the not too distant future, but I must have time to review the situation.”
Enforcement of the ban, which targets app stores and internet hosting services that carry TikTok, is ultimately up to the Justice Department. Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco said ensuring compliance with the law “will be a process that plays out over time,” without elaborating. Justice Department leaders stopped short of saying they would not enforce the law, the type of assurance that legal analysts have said companies may be looking for to prevent the app from going dark on Sunday.
It was not immediately clear whether the noncommittal remarks from Trump or the Biden administration would deter companies tasked with implementing the law, including app store giants Google and Apple, from shuttering the app. Google and Apple did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Pam Bondi, Trump’s attorney general pick, declined to commit to enforcing the law during her Senate confirmation hearing this week.
The justices emphasized that their opinion applies narrowly to TikTok, but free speech advocates criticized the ruling, saying it would expand government censorship.
Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute, said that while TikTok’s future will ultimately be determined by “politics,” the court’s decision “has weakened the First Amendment and markedly expanded the government’s power to restrict speech in the name of national security.”
At oral arguments last week, a majority of justices appeared to credit Congress’s concern about the Chinese government covertly using the app to collect vast amounts of sensitive data about millions of American users and potentially exploiting that information to blackmail young Americans or turn them into spies.
Several justices from across the ideological spectrum emphasized that foreign entities do not have First Amendment rights and that the site could continue to operate in a similar manner but under different, non-Chinese ownership.
The case was heard and decided on an expedited schedule as the deadline approached. In their challenge, the company and TikTok creators said the government’s national security concerns do not justify an unprecedented, sweeping restriction on the speech of TikTok users.
The justices were reviewing a unanimous ruling in December by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit that said the TikTok ban was permissible. A three-judge panel, made up of judges appointed by presidents in both parties, said the law does not take aim at a particular viewpoint and is a reasonable response to Congress’s national security concerns.
While Trump has pledged to rescue the app from the ban-or-sale law, how he plans to do so remains unclear. The Washington Post reported Wednesday that the president-elect is exploring unorthodox ways to aid the platform, including issuing an executive order once he takes office that would suspend enforcement of the law for 60 to 90 days. Legal experts have questioned whether an executive order can stop a law passed by Congress.
Trump said earlier this week that until the Supreme Court weighed in, “nobody knows” TikTok’s fate.
Still, the president-elect has repeatedly given TikTok’s allies cause for hope, including inviting the company’s CEO, Shou Zi Chew, to attend his swearing-in ceremony as an honored guest on the dais. Chew is also slated to attend at least two other celebrations for Trump ahead of his inauguration Monday, including a reception for the incoming Cabinet and a dinner for Vice President-elect JD Vance this weekend.
Under the TikTok law, known as the Protecting Americans From Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, app-store giants such as Google and Apple and internet-hosting services could face massive fines if they continue to carry TikTok on their products beyond the Sunday deadline for divestment. Infractions could cost companies $5,000 for each user that continues to access TikTok, which could add up to billions of dollars in penalties.
The law is aimed at forcing app stores and internet hosting services to stop carrying TikTok, executives inside the company have discussed pulling the app offline for U.S. users on Sunday to highlight how disruptive a ban would be, according to a person familiar with their thinking who spoke on the condition of anonymity to share internal plans. The Information first reported on the possibility, but the person familiar with the discussions said no final decision had been made.
TikTok lawyer Noel Francisco said during oral argument that his understanding was the platform would “go dark” on Sunday if the court did not delay the law and the White House did not delay implementation.
TikTok has not publicly commented on its plans. TikTok employees in the United States were sent an email Tuesday saying the company was “planning for various scenarios” and that its offices would remain open “even if this situation hasn’t been resolved before the January 19 deadline.”
Even a temporary ban could lead to a major user exodus from which it would be difficult for the company to recover, according to TikTok. Even though the app would probably remain on the devices of users in the event of a ban, it could become inoperable, or their lack of access to updates could degrade their use of the site. TikTok’s website could also cease to function on internet browsers.
This week, ahead of the court’s decision, many users calling themselves “TikTok refugees” began shifting to competing video apps including the Chinese-owned RedNote and ByteDance-owned Lemon8. ByteDance could still stave off a TikTok ban by selling the app, but the company has insisted it does not plan to do so, and the Chinese government has said it opposes divestiture.
Still, potential suitors are lining up bids. Chinese officials are reportedly considering allowing Elon Musk, a close Trump ally, to buy TikTok’s U.S. operations, according to Bloomberg and the Wall Street Journal. TikTok denies those reports. Business magnate Frank McCourt and “Shark Tank” star Kevin O’Leary mounted a separate $20 billion bid.