Mashable 2024年12月19日
Supreme Court must halt TikTok ban, ACLU argues
index_new5.html
../../../zaker_core/zaker_tpl_static/wap/tpl_guoji1.html

 

美国公民自由联盟(ACLU)已正式向美国最高法院上诉,试图阻止即将到来的TikTok禁令。ACLU认为该禁令是对美国宪法第一修正案的侵犯,侵犯了数百万美国人自由表达和与全球互动的权利。尽管TikTok否认与中国政府有联系,并强调其对用户数据的保护,但美国政府仍以国家安全为由强制要求TikTok出售。此前,哥伦比亚特区上诉法院驳回了TikTok的紧急禁令请求,但ACLU及其合作伙伴认为,该法院未能充分考虑禁令对用户言论自由的影响。他们强调,限制公民接触外国媒体是与压制政权相关的做法,并对此表示担忧。

⚖️美国公民自由联盟(ACLU)已向最高法院上诉,反对TikTok禁令,认为其违反了宪法第一修正案,即美国公民的言论自由权。

📢 ACLU、电子前沿基金会(EFF)和哥伦比亚大学奈特第一修正案研究所共同提交了非当事人意见陈述,强调禁令是对1.7亿美国TikTok用户言论自由权的侵犯。

🛡️尽管TikTok否认与中国政府有关联,并表示保护用户数据,美国政府仍以国家安全为由强制要求其出售,ACLU认为这种强制出售是违宪的。

🚫 ACLU指出,限制公民访问外国媒体是与压制政权相关的做法,并对这种做法在美国扎根表示担忧。

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has formally appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court to block the expected TikTok ban, which looms over the social media company as January approaches.

"The Constitution imposes an extraordinarily high bar on this kind of mass censorship. The Supreme Court should take up this important case and protect the rights of millions of Americans to freely express themselves and engage with others around the world," wrote deputy director of ACLU’s National Security Project Patrick Toomey. The amicus brief was submitted together by the ACLU, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), and the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University.

TikTok and its allies have called the ban a violation of the First Amendment right to free speech, and the company has consistently denied any connections to Chinese government intelligence or the sharing of American users' data, which is the leading justification for the forced divestment of TikTok from Chinese ownership.

Barring an intervention by the highest court, the ban, signed by President Biden in April, will go into effect Jan. 19. TikTok could still divest from its parent company, ByteDance, to comply with the law and halt an outright ban, but it has resisted any sale so far. This week, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals denied an emergency injunction submitted by TikTok that would delay the ban's effect until the Supreme Court could render an opinion under strict scrutiny. The Appeals court argued that highest scrutiny had been reached, and that national security interests justified the U.S. government's action.

The ACLU and its partners argue the court's reasoning is incorrect. "The D.C. Circuit failed to fully address the law’s profound implications for the First Amendment rights of the 170 million Americans who use TikTok," wrote the ACLU. "While the lower court’s decision correctly recognized that the statute triggers First Amendment scrutiny, it barely addressed users’ First Amendment interests in speaking, sharing, and receiving information on the platform. The court also perplexingly attempted to cast the government’s ban on TikTok as a vindication of users’ First Amendment rights, which it is not."

The ACLU has retained that the TikTok ban is a violation of federally protected rights, including free speech, calling the forceable sale "unconstitutional" in a statement released in March. A few months prior the civil rights organization argued that a ban on any such social media app would be "a dangerous act of censorship."

"Restricting citizens’ access to foreign media is a practice that has long been associated with repressive regimes," wrote Jameel Jaffer, executive director at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, "and we should be very wary of letting the practice take root here."

Fish AI Reader

Fish AI Reader

AI辅助创作,多种专业模板,深度分析,高质量内容生成。从观点提取到深度思考,FishAI为您提供全方位的创作支持。新版本引入自定义参数,让您的创作更加个性化和精准。

FishAI

FishAI

鱼阅,AI 时代的下一个智能信息助手,助你摆脱信息焦虑

联系邮箱 441953276@qq.com

相关标签

ACLU TikTok禁令 言论自由 第一修正案 国家安全
相关文章