Tik On, Tok Off
The Supreme Court has spoken, and TikTok’s days in the U.S. seem numbered—or so you’d think. In a unanimous 9-0 decision, the Court upheld a law requiring ByteDance to divest from TikTok’s U.S. operations by January 20th, citing national security concerns. The ruling dismissed arguments that banning TikTok would violate the First Amendment. On paper, it’s a decisive move to curb the influence of a platform owned by a Chinese company. But as with all things TikTok, the drama is far from over.
The plot has thickened in ways that could only happen in today’s political landscape, where laws are passed, presidents choose to ignore them, and influencers perform synchronized U-turns to align with their favorite politicians. Let’s unpack the chaos.
The National Security Threat (That Isn’t?)
The legal and political case against TikTok has always rested on its supposed threat to national security. ByteDance, as a Chinese-owned company, is subject to China’s cybersecurity laws, which could theoretically require it to share U.S. user data with the Chinese government. That’s why Trump signed an executive order in 2020 to ban the app outright, a move that set the stage for Congress’s recent bipartisan push to codify a TikTok ban into law.
The Supreme Court decision could have been the final nail in TikTok’s coffin—until both the past and present presidents decided they weren’t all that interested in enforcing it.
Joe Biden, who signed the law in question, declared before the ruling that he wouldn’t enforce it. And Trump, the OG TikTok ban evangelist, has now flipped his stance entirely. He’s calling for a 90-day moratorium on enforcement to “negotiate a deal” and has floated the idea of a 50/50 ownership split between ByteDance and “the U.S.”—though it’s unclear if he means a U.S.-based company or the federal government.
So what happened to the big national security threat? Was the goal all along for the Supreme Court to strike down the law as unconstitutional so Congress and the administration could say, “We tried!” and wash their hands of the controversy? Or is this just another case of political opportunism?
Trump’s TikTok Pivot
Let’s talk about Trump. In 2020, he was ready to send TikTok packing, signing an executive order to ban the app entirely. Now, he’s TikTok’s savior—or so TikTok says. When the platform went offline on January 18th, it cited Trump’s statements as the reason it felt confident coming back online two days later, despite no change in the law.
Why the change of heart? Could it have something to do with the $96 million donated to the 2024 election cycle by Jeff Yass, the founder of TikTok’s biggest advertising partner, Susquehanna International? Maybe. Or perhaps Trump just loves being the wildcard who flips the script. Either way, his new stance has left conservative influencers, who once cheered a TikTok ban, scrambling to align their talking points with his latest position.
And it’s not just influencers. The entire narrative around TikTok has shifted overnight, with key players walking back earlier positions to reflect Trump’s newfound support for keeping the platform alive—at least under certain conditions. What was once framed as an existential threat to American sovereignty is suddenly a problem that can be negotiated away with a creative ownership split.
The Legal Mess
Here’s where things get tricky. Biden signed this law. Congress passed it with bipartisan support. The Supreme Court upheld it unanimously. By all accounts, it’s legally ironclad. But what good is a law if no one enforces it?
Trump has effectively declared that an executive order can override a law, encouraging app stores to keep TikTok available and private companies to ignore the ban. It’s not how the system is supposed to work, but if enforcement is nonexistent, what’s to stop him?
If TikTok continues operating in defiance of the law, what recourse does the government have? The Supreme Court can’t enforce laws—it can only interpret them. Congress could vote to overturn the law it passed, but there’s little appetite for that. For now, we’re left in legal limbo, where a bipartisan law is simultaneously upheld and ignored.
And while this legal ambiguity plays out, TikTok’s users are left to wonder whether their favorite platform will still be around tomorrow. Advertisers and creators, meanwhile, are stuck trying to navigate a landscape where TikTok’s future remains uncertain, even as its daily operations continue unaffected—for now.
TikTok’s Strategic Shutdown
TikTok’s decision to take itself offline briefly before reappearing on January 20th shows the app isn’t afraid to play hardball. It’s a power move, designed to apply maximum pressure on politicians. By shuttering itself, TikTok sent a clear message: “If you want us gone, you’ll have to deal with the fallout from millions of angry users.”
The strategy appears to have worked, at least partially. While Trump has publicly encouraged app stores to keep TikTok available, they’ve largely refrained from allowing new downloads due to the obvious legal risks. TikTok’s gamble is that it can survive long enough for a favorable resolution, whether that’s a deal brokered by Trump or further legal challenges to the ban.
But even with Trump’s blessing, TikTok’s future is far from secure. Any attempt to enforce Trump’s proposed joint ownership model would likely face its own set of legal challenges. ByteDance retaining partial ownership of TikTok U.S. doesn’t resolve the core national security issue; under Chinese law, any ByteDance-owned entity is still subject to potential data-sharing mandates.
And while TikTok users celebrate the platform’s temporary reprieve, the legal uncertainty around its operations will undoubtedly create headaches for advertisers and creators alike.
A Bigger Question: What’s the Point of Laws?
There’s a larger question lurking beneath all this: What’s the point of laws if presidents can ignore them?
Whatever your feelings about TikTok or its alleged security risks, the law requiring ByteDance to divest was passed by Congress, signed by the president, and upheld by the Supreme Court. That’s about as definitive as it gets in a democracy. Yet here we are, watching two presidents essentially shrug at its enforcement.
It’s not just a TikTok issue. The precedent being set here is that even the most bipartisan, court-approved legislation can be treated as optional if it’s politically inconvenient. And that’s a slippery slope—one that undermines the very foundations of a government bound by laws.
What’s Next for TikTok—and the U.S.?
For now, TikTok continues to operate in defiance of the law, emboldened by Trump’s new stance and Biden’s unwillingness to enforce the ban. But how long can this limbo last?
TikTok’s long-term survival likely depends on its ability to negotiate a deal that satisfies both U.S. lawmakers and its own corporate interests. But any such deal will have to grapple with the fundamental issue of ByteDance’s ownership. A 50/50 ownership split, as Trump has suggested, does little to address the underlying security concerns, given that ByteDance would still be subject to Chinese laws.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling raises another question: How will the justices react if the law they upheld is openly flouted? While the Court itself has no enforcement power, the situation puts its authority—and the integrity of the U.S. legal system—on shaky ground.
The TikTok saga is a case study in the contradictions of modern politics. Laws are passed and ignored, national security threats are treated as bargaining chips, and political stances shift on a dime when convenient.
Whatever your thoughts on TikTok—whether you see it as a creative outlet, a national security threat, or just a platform to watch dance videos—it’s clear this fight is far from over. The only certainty is uncertainty, and for now, TikTok continues to dance in the gray area between legality and defiance.
Apple should have blocked it long before Congress acted.
What the law did was give them cover; it’s not on the App Store.
(Even if it was available, both my wife and my employers prohibit……)