On January 19, for many, access to the world around them went dark when TikTok was removed from all app stores and access was restricted from devices for less than 24 hours. Immediately, the United States saw a massive uptick in VPN downloads as users tried to circumvent the TikTok ban (instituted by Congress via H.R. 7521, passed in the Senate, signed by President Biden, and upheld by the Supreme Court with zero dissents). The initial ban was proposed during the first Trump administration, but it has received ongoing support from both sides of the aisle, as well as from the Department of Justice, which has been involved in discussions about the legality of the app’s current operation in the United States.

Growing up overseas in a country where access to information, ideas, and perspectives was often tightly controlled, I saw firsthand the negative implications on knowledge, psyche, and the development of critical thinking skills caused by limitations on speech and access to information. We had educators in my private (not government-run) school who were let go for refusing to limit the history we were taught based on a misalignment of narratives with that nation’s government. I, of all people, am particularly sensitive to free speech and the implications for society when varying ideas are not acceptable. However, the TikTok ban, as is, is not a rallying cry for free speech; rather, it is a measure to combat foreign espionage and the ease with which our citizens’ data can be accessed. 

Per the Supreme Court: “As of January 19, the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act will make it unlawful for companies in the United States to provide services to distribute, maintain, or update the social media platform TikTok, unless U. S. operation of the platform is severed from Chinese control…We consider whether the Act, as applied to petitioners, violates the First Amendment.”

In its ruling, the Court recognized that national security concerns played a significant role in its examination of whether the law violated free speech protections under the First Amendment. The Justices’ primary concern was data collection and use by a foreign adversary. According to the Court, “TikTok’s scale and susceptibility to foreign adversary control, together with the vast swaths of sensitive data the platform collects, justify differential treatment to address the government’s national security concerns.”

Those who oppose the ban argue that the government is restricting access to information like an autocratic state and that a violation of free speech under the First Amendment of the Constitution is taking place. However, that argument is moot in a system where existing social media organizations share the same data, albeit in a different format than what users prefer (e.g. Facebook, Reddit, X, and Instagram). Advocates for keeping the application operational as is argue that there are bigger problems to address, such as Chinese ownership of U.S. farmland. Another concern is the impact on the income streams of American-based influencers. The average salary for TikTok influencers is around $131,000; however, that figure does not tell the full story. Over 50% of influencers earn less than $15,000 a year, with fewer than a third earning a full-time salary. Despite these numbers, there are valid concerns about revenue streams being limited to those who make their living from TikTok. However, these concerns are not mutually exclusive. While the TikTok ban is both constitutionally sound and the correct decision for the safety of our citizens, the lack of transparency and effective communication regarding the national security concerns the ban is addressing lies solely with elected officials and an inability to combat an ongoing messaging problem. 


In following blogs, I will break down the TikTok ban issue: major concerns about the app prior to the initial ban, including the cybersecurity implications that raised alarms among many in the intelligence sector; the Biden administration’s ban; and President Trump’s prospective way forward, as we know it.