吃瓜大本营

MISSOULA, Mont. 鈥� The American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Montana, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) applaud a ruling by the federal district court in Montana that blocks SB 419, Montana鈥檚 TikTok ban, from going into effect on January 1, 2024. The ruling in favor of four TikTok creators and the company marks a significant victory for the people of Montana and their First Amendment protections, preserving their access to TikTok as a vital platform for communication, information, and self-expression. 鈥淢ontana鈥檚 law violates the First Amendment, plain and simple, and the court was right to halt it,鈥� said Patrick Toomey, deputy director of ACLU鈥檚 National Security Project. 鈥淭he Constitution imposes an extraordinarily high bar on this kind of mass censorship.鈥� The ACLU, ACLU of Montana, and EFF filed an amicus brief urging the court to see this law for what it is: a sweeping ban on free expression that triggers the most exacting scrutiny under the First Amendment. Today鈥檚 decision ensures that TikTok will continue to play an important and significant role for communities of color, including Indigenous communities in Montana, who use the platform to foster solidarity online and to highlight issues vital to them. And it reaffirms the unique ways in which Montanans rely on TikTok to communicate and interact with people around the country and the world every day. 鈥淲ith this ban, Governor Gianforte and the Montana legislature tried to trample on the free speech of hundreds of thousands of Montanans who use the app to express themselves, gather information, and run their small business in the name of anti-Chinese sentiment,鈥� said Alex Rate, legal director at the ACLU of Montana. 鈥淲e will never trade our First Amendment rights for cheap political points.鈥� The district court鈥檚 First Amendment ruling has important implications for other draconian efforts to ban TikTok around the country, including proposals in Congress. Proposed federal bills like the RESTRICT Act will run headlong into the same constitutional obstacles. 鈥淢any Montanans use TikTok to communicate with local and global audiences. We are pleased that a federal judge has blocked the state from violating their rights by banning this speech platform,鈥� said David Greene, EFF鈥檚 Civil Liberties Director. Today鈥檚 decision is available here: /documents/montana-tiktok-ban-preliminary-injunction-opinion-11-30-2023 A coalition letter opposing Montana鈥檚 TikTok ban is available here: /documents/coalition-letter-opposing-montana-house-bill-that-would-ban-tiktok

HELENA 鈥� Montana Governor Greg Gianforte signed an unconstitutional statewide TikTok ban into law today, over the objections of the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Montana, and other free-speech organizations. 鈥淲ith this ban, Governor Gianforte and the Montana legislature have trampled on the free speech of hundreds of thousands of Montanans who use the app to express themselves, gather information, and run their small business in the name of anti-Chinese sentiment,鈥� said Keegan Medrano, policy director at the ACLU of Montana. 鈥淲e will never trade our First Amendment rights for cheap political points.鈥� The ban will prohibit TikTok from operating in the state, and will also prohibit app stores from allowing users in Montana to download the TikTok app. If companies allow users to download the app, they鈥檒l initially be fined $10,000, and then another $10,000 for every day the violation continues. If the courts don鈥檛 act, the ban will go into effect on January 1, 2024. As the ACLU and half a dozen free speech and civil liberties organizations explained in a letter sent to the Montana House of Representatives in April, this legislation flouts the First Amendment. The government cannot impose a total ban on a communications platform like TikTok unless it is necessary to prevent extremely serious, immediate harm to national security. But there鈥檚 no public evidence of harm that would meet the high bar set by the U.S. and Montana Constitutions, and a total ban would not be the only option for addressing such harm if it did exist.

WASHINGTON 鈥� In a letter sent to the House Foreign Affairs Committees today, the American Civil Liberties Union has urged members to vote no on HR 1153, a bill introduced by House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Michael McCaul (R-Texas) on Friday, that would effectively ban TikTok in the U.S., violating the First Amendment rights of millions of Americans who use the app to communicate and express themselves daily. 鈥淐ongress must not censor entire platforms and strip Americans of their constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression. Whether we鈥檙e discussing the news of the day, live streaming protests, or 鈥嬧�媏ven watching cat videos, we have a right to use TikTok and other platforms to exchange our thoughts, ideas, and opinions with people around the country and around the world,鈥� said Jenna Leventoff, senior policy counsel at ACLU. HR 1153 is intended to effectively ban TikTok in the U.S. 鈥� and could ban many other businesses and applications as well 鈥� by requiring the secretary of the treasury to forbid U.S. citizens from engaging with entities that 鈥渕ay鈥� transfer sensitive personal data to a foreign entity that is 鈥渟ubject to the influence of China.鈥� It would also require the president to impose sanctions on foreign entities operating software that is 鈥渟ubject to the jurisdiction or鈥� influence of China鈥� and that 鈥渕ay be facilitating鈥� a long list of activities by the Chinese government. Finally, the law would exempt 鈥渟ensitive personal data鈥� from the protection of the Berman Amendment. Passed in 1988, it鈥檚 what protects our right to receive information, regardless of what country that information was created in. That means the U.S. government can鈥檛 ban a book by a Chinese author simply because it鈥檚 from China 鈥� or in this case, you can鈥檛 ban a social media platform simply because the app is from a Chinese company. The bill text and markup notice were made available online just 48 hours before the scheduled markup, and the House Foreign Affairs Committee has never held a hearing on this bill. This lack of notice and transparency means there has been no time for lawmakers to ask questions or hear from outside experts who could explain the immense consequences of this vague and overbroad legislation. As the ACLU noted when former President Trump tried to ban TikTok nationally in 2020, selective bans of entire platforms 鈥渃ould cut off the flow of information, art, and communication that social media provides, interfering with communities and connections users in the United States have with each other and with people around the world. This interference with freedom of expression and association violates the First Amendment.鈥�