Comment by TeaBrain
2 days ago
I read the transcript also, and from what I read, I don't disagree that Francisco answered competently, but he may have been given an impossible task. The law was upheld, as I suggested the justices were leaning towards. I didn't see the decision being unanimous, but that's the way it came down.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-01-17/tiktok-ba...
Yip, gotta say I'm extremely surprised - not that it passed per se, but by 9-0?! I wish more of the justices wrote opinions. Gorsuch's opinion was pretty enlightening, but simultaneously even more confusing. Apparently the judges deemed the law of a "compelling interest" and "content neutral" which enabled it to sidestep a "strict scrutiny" of Constitutional appropriateness.
Yet his opinion was almost entirely critical of the arguments that justified such. And it also seemed to include misinformation (unless it happens that I'm misinformed) suggesting that the TikTok app could access "any data" - a term which he himself put in quotes and also italicized - about anybody in a user's contact list. He said it included, but was not limited to photos and personal information. And this leaking of data of non-consenting users was apparently a significant part of the case. I'd be beyond surprised if the Android/Apple APIs bleed any substantial amount of information through contact access alone.
Interesting times we live in, as always!