Trump asks Supreme Court to delay TikTok divestment law

President-elect Donald Trump asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday to delay the effect of a federal law that could bar TikTok in the United States or compel its sale, with the measure due to take effect one day before his Jan. 20 inauguration. In a court filing, Trump said he wants time to seek a negotiated outcome that would preserve access to the platform while addressing national-security concerns linked to its ownership.

The request adds a political and diplomatic dimension to a case already before the high court. The law, passed earlier this year, targets TikTok because its parent company, ByteDance, is based in Beijing. Under the measure, TikTok faces removal from the U.S. market unless the ownership issue is resolved through a sale or other structure acceptable under the statute.

John Sauer, whom Trump has selected to serve as solicitor general, filed the brief on Trump’s behalf. Sauer argued that the timing of the law would limit Trump’s ability, once in office, to conduct foreign policy and pursue a settlement that he said could protect national security while keeping available a social-media service used by 170 million Americans.

The brief framed TikTok as both a security matter and a forum for speech. Sauer said the platform is used by Americans to exercise First Amendment rights, and asked the justices to pause the law’s deadline so the incoming administration can attempt to resolve the dispute through negotiation.

A shift from Trump’s first term

Trump’s position marks a change from his approach during his first administration, when he sought to ban TikTok. MarketWatch reported that Trump has since said he opposes such a ban.

The case places the Supreme Court at the center of a dispute involving technology policy, national security and U.S.-China relations. The law is designed to address concerns that TikTok’s ties to ByteDance could create risks for U.S. users or the American information environment. The filing did not resolve those concerns, but asked the court to give the incoming president room to pursue a different outcome.

A delay would not decide the legal merits of the statute. It would suspend the immediate deadline while the court considers the case and while Trump, after taking office, attempts to negotiate a resolution. Without such relief, the law’s restrictions would be scheduled to take effect before Trump returns to the White House.

The Supreme Court is expected to rule on the law. Its decision will determine whether the statutory deadline proceeds as scheduled, is put on hold, or is otherwise altered as the legal challenge continues.

This story draws on original reporting from MarketWatch.