NetChoice and the Chamber of Progress back TikTok's lawsuit to stop a Montana law meant to ban the app on January 1, 2024; a hearing is set for October 12, 2023
Context & Ripple Effects
Montana’s measure was framed as a first-of-its-kind state restriction that would also put app-store distribution in scope; it prompted an early challenge to a state-level TikTok ban.
The case already included a separate creator-led lawsuit against the law. NetChoice and the Chamber of Progress add trade-group support as the October hearing approaches, broadening the opposition beyond TikTok and its users.
First-order effects
- TikTok’s bid to halt the law gains support from two technology-industry advocacy groups ahead of the scheduled hearing.
- Montana must defend its planned restriction against a larger coalition arguing that the law should not take effect.
Second-order effects
- App stores and other online-distribution businesses gain a direct stake in the litigation because the law’s design reaches their ability to offer TikTok in Montana.
- The groups’ participation puts more weight behind legal arguments that a single state’s app ban could impose obligations on internet businesses operating across state lines.
Third-order effects
- The case tests whether states can use app-specific restrictions to address platform concerns, or whether constitutional and interstate-commerce constraints limit that approach.
- If similar coalitions repeatedly form around state platform bans, disputes over platform governance are likely to be resolved more through nationwide legal standards than isolated state enforcement.
The trend: Platform policy is increasingly being contested through state-level laws whose practical reach extends to national app-distribution and internet-service systems.