Скачать или смотреть TRUMP TRIES TO SAVE TIKTOK

#trumptiktok
#supremecourt
#tiktokban
#tiktoklaw
#uslaw
#nationalsecurity
#freespeech
#firstamendment
#tiktokdebate
#lawandpolitics
#legalexperts
#constitutionallaw
#courtcase
#scotus
#politicalpower
#legalprecedent
#tiktokcase
#trumpcampaign
#justicesystem
#techregulation
#socialmediapolicy
#bidenadministration
#bytedance
#chinarelations
#techlaw
#presidentialpower
#lawandorder
#governmentintervention
#trumplegalbrief
#legalchallenge
#supremecourtcase
#politicsandlaw
#trumpadministration
#tiktokapp
#lawnews
#politicalinfluence
#electionpolitics
#uslawmakers
#legalanalysis
#politicallaw
#nationalsecurityconcerns
#tiktokbandebate
#legalopinions
#trump2025
#socialmediaregulation
#courtintervention
#firstamendmentrights
#techcensorship
#politicalrequests
#tiktokfreespeech











The article centers on President-elect Donald Trump’s request to the U.S. Supreme Court to delay the enforcement of a law that could effectively ban TikTok in the U.S. The law mandates that TikTok sever its ties with its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, by January 19, 2025, or face a ban. Trump’s legal team filed a brief asking the Court to pause the law’s enforcement until after Trump assumes office, citing his ability to negotiate a resolution on national security concerns while preserving the platform.

Legal experts, however, criticize Trump’s request, saying it lacks a valid legal foundation. Alan Rozenshtein, a former Department of Justice official, asserts that it is unprecedented for a president-elect to ask the Court to delay a law passed by Congress, especially without addressing the law’s constitutionality. The experts argue that the Supreme Court cannot overstep its authority by granting such a request, as it would set a dangerous precedent that undermines the legislative process.

Georgetown University Law Center professor Stephen Vladeck called the brief legally unfounded, accusing Trump’s legal team of putting politics ahead of law. He also criticized the tone of the brief, which included praise for Trump’s "dealmaking expertise" and "electoral mandate," which Vladeck found excessive and inappropriate for a legal argument. These elements, he argues, diminish the credibility of Trump’s legal team and could negatively affect future interactions between the government and the Court.

Right-leaning legal scholars also expressed surprise and concern over Trump’s request. Jack Goldsmith, a Harvard law professor, stated that the brief damages the credibility of the incoming Solicitor General even before taking office. Josh Blackman, a conservative constitutional law professor, noted that this is a rare and unusual instance where an incoming president seeks to intervene in an ongoing legal matter to counteract the actions of the current administration.

Despite these criticisms, some believe the Supreme Court may still consider Trump’s request due to the influence of an incoming president. However, many legal experts hope the Court will reject the request to preserve the integrity of the TRUMP TRIES TO SAVE TIKTOK #trumptiktok #supremecourt #tiktokban #tiktoklaw process and uphold the rule of law. If the Court grants the request, there would be no legal recourse to reverse the decision, as the Supreme Court’s rulings are final.