Discussion

• @mjsdc Mark Joseph Stern on bluesky

  A brand new principle of constitutional law, unfolding before our eyes: It is unconstitutional (!) for Congress to enact a law that happens to take effect one day before the next president is inaugurated, at least if he's named Trump. www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/ 24...  [image…

• @mjsdc Mark Joseph Stern on bluesky

  Trump's TikTok brief just fundamentally doesn't make sense: How could SCOTUS freeze the Jan. 19 deadline on the grounds that Trump might ... unlawfully suspend it when he gets into office?  Rewrite the law now so Trump can break it later?  The ask here is incoherent. www.supremec…

• @mikeisaac Rat King on bluesky

  well at least all the lawyers got three years of billable hours  —  www.nytimes.com/2024/12/27/u...  [image]

• @bobbyallyn Bobby Allyn on bluesky

  I called up @stevevladeck.bsky.social for reflections on Trump's TikTok brief:  —  “What's stunning about it is it cites no legal authority and acts as if he's already president,” he said.  “It's a nakedly political law-free brief.”

• @carnage4life Dare Obasanjo on bluesky

  Donald Trump filed an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to block a TikTok ban as he pursues a political resolution.  —  As Truth Social's founder, he warns of the dangers of government censorship of social media.  —  The Biden administration has handed an early win to Trump. …

• @chrisgeidner Chris Geidner on bluesky

  The Trump amicus brief in the TikTok case is wild, not the least of which is because it explicitly is premised on “I'll be president soon” and because the brief — full of puffery (at best) — is authored by his choice for solicitor general, D. John Sauer. www.supremecourt.gov/Dock…

• @jeremyz @jeremyz on bluesky

  the democrats handing saving tiktok to trump is one of the more embarrassing unforced errors of the biden regime.  [embedded post]

• @zachsdorfman Zach Dorfman on bluesky

  It's funny; I remember passionate arguments by Trump 1.0 admin officials that TikTok was a major threat to national security, and how secret intelligence—which could not be shared with the public—proved their case even more damningly.  [embedded post]

• @jameeljaffer Jameel Jaffer on bluesky

  The brief that Trump just filed in the TikTok case is worth reading.  It will certainly get read by the Justices. www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/ 24...  [image]

• @mmasnick Mike Masnick on bluesky

  Trump asks SCOTUS to delay the effective date of the TikTok ban because he's “one of the most powerful, prolific, and influential users of social media in history” and also he “possesses the consummate dealmaking expertise...& political will to negotiate a resolution to save the …

• @mgsiegler M.G. Siegler on threads

  I can't believe it's only Day Negative 23 of the new Trump administration.

• @mgsiegler M.G. Siegler on threads

  Checks (books) and (bank) balances.

• @jeffjarvis @jeffjarvis on x

  The Trump TikTok brief is a laughable and pornographic exercise in imperial fluffing. The emperor has no clothes < The president has no ego. (But I want TikTok to stay.) https://www.supremecourt.gov/ ... [image]

• @jamesrbuk James Ball on x

  The US controls every other major platform, and US intelligence exploits that advantage globally - Snowden's NSA revelations showed that. Is the US unwilling to put up with even one platform it doesn't run, as it asks every other country to put up with controlling none?

• @luke_metro @luke_metro on x

  Somebody send the tech right to mar-a-lago stat [image]

• @stokel Chris Stokel-Walker on x

  This is a wild switch given four years ago Trump was campaigning to ban TikTok

• @jamesrbuk James Ball on x

  Honestly, I think Trump has presented a good challenge to US securocrats on TikTok here. If TikTok is doing something so different and so dangerous, why not declassify the evidence and get it banned? Instead of keeping it secret and risking the whole thing.

• @yashar Yashar Ali on x

  NEWS President-elect Trump has filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in the TikTok matter.  He has asked the court to issue a stay.  If the court doesn't issue a stay and TikTok's parent company fails to find a buyer, TikTok will be banned in the United States starting on …

• @rmfifthcircuit Raffi Melkonian on x

  Heh. An amicus brief from the president elect from the solicitor general elect(?) designate(?)

• @tysonbrody Tyson Brody on x

  the question is whether they sell to elon or ellison

• @jimsciutto Jim Sciutto on x

  So last night I'm told on the air that China is such a threat Trump may take back the Panama Canal and tonight Trump says that TikTok - which bipartisan legislation and the intel community deem a threat - doesn't need to be banned. What explains the contradiction?

• @stevesosnick Steve Sosnick on x

  @sonalibasak Jeff Yass getting something for his ~$100mm in political contributions https://washingtonpost.com/......

• @matthewstoller Matt Stoller on x

  I like how Trump treats the Supreme Court like they work for him. https://www.bloomberg.com/...

• @mikeisaac Rat King on x

  filing injunctive relief for the Supreme Court to recognize me as a born poster [image]

• @rushdoshi Rush Doshi on x

  Getting harder to argue that Trump 2.0 will get China right if the opening play is to let TikTok operate as usual. Maybe there will be a real debate on this and the new team ends up where Biden and bipartisan Congressional majorities did. Or maybe not... [image]

• @pitdesi Sheel Mohnot on x

  Trump wanted a ban of TikTok in 2020. Jeffrey Yass, whose Susquehanna fund owns 15% of the company, donated $96M to R's this election cycle Unsurprisingly, Trump now opposes the ban. [image]

• @jamesrbuk James Ball on x

  The way it escapes looking hypocritical is claiming it has classified material that shows TikTok is way worse than everyone else. But if it wants the world to believe that - if it wants Americans to believe that - show us the receipts.

• @jacobhuebert Jacob Huebert on x

  Although Trump's brief says it's “in support of neither party,” he makes clear that he opposed the TikTok ban and still does: [image]

• @mikesacksesq Mike Sacks on x

  Trump's incoming Solicitor General asking SCOTUS to milk his win in the immunity case to make more Law of Trump https://www.supremecourt.gov/ ... [image]

• @derektmuller Derek T. Muller on x

  The notion that some private citizen is asking the Court to suspend the deadline set by Congress in a statute is absurd. You take office January 20. Sorry if things happen January 19 you don't like.

• @dnlbrns Daniel Barnes on x

  Trump says he alone can save TikTok from being banned in the US and urges SCOTUS to issue a stay to give him time to negotiate a deal. Doesn't get into specifics, but overturning the ban law could require action from Congress. Brief: https://www.supremecourt.gov/ ... [image]

• @markwarner Mark Warner on x

  Interesting turn of events: Trump called TikTok a national security risk, but now he's asking for a stay on a congressionally-passed ban. 🤔

• @anupamchander Anupam Chander on x

  3. We would never say that if we shutter a newspaper, you can simply buy a different one. We shouldn't say that you can simply move to Reels or YouTube, either. 3/ [image]

• @adamkovac Adam Kovacevich on x

  Despite the breathless reporting on Trump's brief, it feels utterly irrelevant. SCOTUS already bypassed the opportunity to enjoin the TikTok law past 1/19, and it is very likely to uphold the DC Circuit's ruling. This brief is political payback for TT, not a real strategy.

• @sonalibasak Sonali Basak on x

  *TRUMP URGES SUPREME COURT TO PAUSE LAW THREATENING TIKTOK BAN This comes HOURS after Biden's Justice Department filed its main brief to the Supreme Court on the TikTok ban and the company filed its counter. Unless blocked, the law would take effect on Jan. 19

• @alexeheath Alex Heath on x

  new season of the apprentice just dropped https://www.theverge.com/...

• @kaitlancollins Kaitlan Collins on x

  News — I'm told Trump spoke with TikTok CEO Shou Chew tonight after the incoming president asked the Supreme Court to pause a ban on TikTok set to go into effect the day before he takes office. The two men met in person at Mar-a-Lago about two weeks ago. https://www.cnn.com/...

• @alaynatreene Alayna Treene on x

  The pause would allow his admin “to pursue a negotiated resolution that could prevent a nationwide shutdown of TikTok, thus preserving the First Amendment rights of tens of millions of Americans, while also addressing the government's national security concerns” Trump wrote

• @repmtg Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene on x

  I'm proud to have voted against the Tik Tok ban bill. Free Speech must be protected and there are smarter ways to reign in China. President Trump is starting that process.

• @anupamchander Anupam Chander on x

  2. The global exchange of ideas would be imperiled by either a divestiture or a ban. [image]

• @luke_metro @luke_metro on x

  tech right mogged by the quant right you hate to see it

• @michaelsobolik Michael Sobolik on x

  Notable, primarily for the following reason: up until today, Trump had walked a fine line between advocating for TikTok, while also avoiding outright opposition to the law. Today, he came out against the statute.

• @scottadamssays Scott Adams on x

  Finding a conservative buyer would be the greatest win of all time.

• @anupamchander Anupam Chander on x

  Some quotes from our First Amendment and Internet Law Professor's TikTok amicus: 1. The Act amounts to a massive suppression of speech—literally losing huge amounts of speech posted by users, or their curated libraries of speech. [image]

• @anupamchander Anupam Chander on x

  Incoming President Trump filed an amicus in the TikTok case seeking a delay in the operation of the law to give him time to resolve the matter, utilizing his “consummate dealmaking expertise”! https://www.supremecourt.gov/ ...

• @evangreer Evan Greer on bluesky

  I'm proud the first SCOTUS amicus @fightforthefuture.org has ever filed is opposing the blatantly unconstitutional & authoritarian attempt to ban TikTok, an app that millions of people use to express themselves.  Big thanks to our friends at ACLU who did heavy lifting here variet…

• @martylederman Marty Lederman on bluesky

  In order to get any of the Justices to be at all sympathetic to its claim, TikTok will have to persuade them, at a minimum, that there'd be a significant harm to users if TikTok disappears.  That might be difficult, b/c the Justices might simply assume ...  [8]

• @martylederman Marty Lederman on bluesky

  I'm only discussing its constitutionality.  —  For those of you who haven't been following, the law doesn't *ban* TikTok—instead, it'll prohibit “app stores” and the like from offering it or servicing it after 01/19 *if* (and only if) there isn't a divestment of TikTok from PRC o…

• @martylederman Marty Lederman on bluesky

  While waiting for other briefs, I'll interlineate a few thoughts and things to look for.  FWIW, I think it's highly likely the SCOTUS will uphold the law.  My posts here will reflect some of the reasons why I think so.  I don't have any strong views on whether the law was wise.  …

• @martylederman Marty Lederman on bluesky

  And here's the Knight Institute brief, also in opposition.  [3]  —  www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/ 24...  @knightcolumbia.org @jameeljaffer.bsky.social

• @rcalo Ryan Calo on x

  Lots of people contributed but counsel @WillkieFarr and profs @AnupamChander @dispositive and Ash Bhagwat took the lead. (Correct me if I'm leaving folks out!) Thanks for the opportunity to work on this important intervention.

• @rcalo Ryan Calo on x

  The Act implicates the speech of millions of Americans. Congress thinks you can cut and paste the dynamic conversation that is TikTok to another platform. This is nonsense. The ban would shut down a music festival because Spotify.

• @rcalo Ryan Calo on x

  Here is our amicus brief submitted to the Suprem Court on behalf of First Amendment and Internet Law Scholars arguing that the TikTok ban is unconstitutional. https://www.supremecourt.gov/ ...