On Friday, the Supreme Court delivered a sweeping broadside against the First Amendment of the Constitution just days ahead ...

This ruling will disappoint the app’s 170 million users in the United States. But it reflects eminently reasonable deference ...

Even as the Supreme Court upheld Congress' mandate that TikTok's Chinese owner sell the platform or shut it down, the First ...

Groups filed briefs with the Supreme Court against the TikTok divest-or-ban law, arguing it violates the First Amendment, and in favor of it.

Today, no law means whatever the court says it means. That happened last week when the Supreme Court upheld congressional ...

The company argued that the law, citing potential Chinese threats to the nation’s security, violated its First Amendment ...

We thank President Trump for providing the necessary clarity and assurance to our service providers that they will face no ...

Doesn’t the Constitution mean what it says? Doesn’t no law mean no law? Regrettably, today, no law means whatever the court ...

Although former President Donald Trump issued an executive order in 2020 directing ByteDance to divest itself of TikTok in the United States, his amicus brief in the Supreme Court, filed late last ...

Will TikTok finally meet its fate Sunday? The future of the app with more than 170 million American users remains uncertain ...

This conclusion will disappoint the app’s 170 million users in the United States. But it reflects ... holding that it passed First Amendment muster. TikTok then asked the Supreme Court to ...