When you buy through affiliate links in our content, we may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. Learn 
TikTok launched a defense against the U.S. government’s claims regarding its ties to China in a federal appeals court yesterday.
The social media platform is fighting to overturn a recently approved divestment bill that could lead to its ban in the United States.
The bill passed on April 23, and signed by President Biden earlier this year, requires TikTok’s owner ByteDance to sell its stake in the U.S. version of the app by January 19, 2025, or face a total ban in the U.S.
In its appeal, TikTok contests the U.S. Department of Justice’s assertions about the app’s connections to China and its data usage and storage practices. The company argues that the government has misunderstood these ties and lacks evidence to support its claims of national security threats.
TikTok’s lawyers emphasize that the app’s recommendation engine, a key point of contention, is located in the United States under Oracle’s protection, not in China as alleged by the government. They also state that there is no evidence of China ever accessing U.S. user data or manipulating content on the platform.
TikTok’s legal team also argues that the company’s content distribution and user communication activities are protected under the First Amendment, regardless of its foreign ownership. They draw a parallel to U.S. media organizations owned by foreign nationals, arguing that such practices do not strip media outlets of constitutional protections.
The appeals court is scheduled to hear oral arguments on September 16, potentially setting the stage for a decision in the final weeks of the November 5 presidential election.
This latest development adds to a series of challenges TikTok has faced in recent years. In 2020, India banned TikTok along with several Chinese apps due to national security concerns. The app has also faced restrictions or bans on government devices in various countries, including the United States, and Canada. The European Commission in April, threatened the platform with a fine if it did not remove what the EC considered “addictive features” in the platform.
