Name: Trump’s Ban on TikTok Violates First Amendment by Eliminating Unique Platform for Political Speech, Activism of Millions of Users, EFF Tells Court
Brand: eff.org
SKU: eff-org-251
Availability: OnlineOnly

critic

Trump’s Ban on TikTok Violates First Amendment by Eliminating Unique Platform for Political Speech, Activism of Millions of Users, EFF Tells Court

preview

Email updates on news, actions,and events in your area.DEEPLINKS BLOGShare ItWe filed a friend-of-the-court —primarily written by the at the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law—in support of a TikTok employee who is challenging President Donald Trump’s ban on TikTok and was seeking a temporary restraining order (TRO). The employee contends that Trump's executive order infringes the Fifth Amendment rights of TikTok's U.S.-based employees. Our brief, which is joined by two prominent TikTok users, urges the court to consider the First Amendment rights of millions of TikTok users when it evaluates the plaintiff’s claims.A ban on TikTok violates fundamental First Amendment principles by eliminating a specific type of speaking, the unique expression of a TikTok user communicating with others through that platform, without sufficient considerations for the users’ speech. Even though the order facially targets the platform, its censorial effects are felt most directly by the users, and thus their First Amendment rights must be considered in analyzing its legality.EFF, the First Amendment Clinic, and the individual amici urge the court to adopt a higher standard of scrutiny when reviewing the plaintiff’s claims against the president. Not only are the plaintiff’s Fifth Amendment liberties at stake, but millions of TikTok users have First Amendment freedoms at stake. The Fifth Amendment and the First Amendment are each critical in securing life, liberty, and due process of law. When these amendments are examined separately, they each deserve careful analysis; but when the interests protected by these amendments come together, a court should apply an even higher standard of scrutiny.The hearing on the TRO scheduled for tomorrow was canceled after the government promised the court that it did not intend to include the payment of wages and salaries within the executive order's definition of prohibited transactions, thus addressing the plaintiff's most urgent claims.&nbsp;&nbsp;Share ItEvery year, millions of images, videos and posts that allegedly contain terrorist or violent extremist content are removed from social media platforms like YouTube, Facebook, or Twitter. A key force behind these takedowns is the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT), an industry-led initiative that seeks toSan Francisco – The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has joined forces with and to represent five advocacy organizations suing President Trump and others in his administration for an unconstitutional executive order threatening their ability to receive accurate information free from government censorship. The plaintiffs...EFF joined forces with Protect Democracy and Cooley LLP to represent five advocacy organizations suing President Trump and others in his administration for an unconstitutional executive order threatening their ability to receive accurate information free from government censorship. The plaintiffs are Common Cause, Free Press, Maplight, Rock the Vote, and...In the U.S., we don’t expect or allow government officials – including judges--to be speech police. Courts are allowed to restrain speech only in the rarest circumstances, subject to strict limitations. So we were troubled to learn that a judge in Missouri has issued an order stifling the speech of...This week, EFF filed suit to stop Texas A&amp;M University from censoring comments by PETA on the university’s Facebook and YouTube pages. In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, Texas A&amp;M held its spring commencement ceremonies online, with broadcasts over Facebook and YouTube. Both the Facebook and YouTube pages had comment...The First Amendment includes the right to use technology to create and preserve images, and otherwise collect information, of newsworthy events. This issue has arisen in numerous contexts, including the right to record the police performing police-work, and we have filed several amicus briefs that have helped firmly establish that...It is ironic that, while purporting to protect America from China’s authoritarian government, President Trump is threatening to . Censorship of both speech and social media applications, after all, is one of the hallmarks of the Chinese Internet strategy. While there is significantThe U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued an historic opinion in , upholding the free speech rights of public school students. The court adopted the position EFF urged in our that the First Amendment prohibits disciplining public school...Mexico has just adopted a terrible new copyright law, thanks to pressure from the United States (and specifically from the copyright maximalists that hold outsized influence on US foreign policy). This law closely resembles the Digital Millennium Copyright Act enacted in the US 1998, with a few differences that make...Update: This post has been corrected as of August 1, 2020 to accurately reflect the details of the NetzDG. For years, free speech and press freedoms have been in Turkey. The country has the distinction of being the and has in...Share It

Email updates on news, actions,and events in your area.DEEPLINKS BLOGShare ItWe filed a friend-of-the-court —primarily written by the at the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law—in support of a TikTok employee who is challenging President Donald Trump’s ban on TikTok and was seeking a temporary restraining order (TRO). The employee contends that Trump's executive order infringes the Fifth Amendment rights of TikTok's U.S.-based employees. Our brief, which is joined by two prominent TikTok users, urges the court to consider the First Amendment rights of millions of TikTok users when it...

public

Nathaniel Sobel

We're the Electronic Frontier Foundation. We defend your civil liberties in a digital world.

Trump’s Ban on TikTok Violates First Amendment by Eliminating Unique Platform for Political Speech, Activism of Millions of Users, EFF Tells Court

No article scores yet.

CRITIC REVIEWS

PUBLIC REVIEWS