Tiktok argued in court on Monday that the US bill that required its parent company to be "non -sale or banned" will have a "amazing" impact on its American users' freedom.

The bill is proposed because of concerns about American user data.Tiktok and byte beating have repeatedly denied contact with China.The group time formed by the three judges on Monday (September 16) in the appeal court in Washington Special Economic Zone heard their debate.

"This bill based on uncertain future risks is actually prohibited by serious remarks," and Andrew Pincus, a lawyer with byte beating, told the court.

The concerns around China were quickly proposed. Pinke said that the company "did not belong to the country.

"The owner of Tiktok is bytewjumping Co., Ltd., a holding company of the Cayman Islands," he said.But Judge Sri Srinivasan responded that the company was "controlled by China."

Pingcis said that the US government did not point out any improper behavior that has already occurred. On the contrary, the company was punished because of possible problems in the future.He said that the decree was aimed at an unprecedented ban on a spokesman, saying that it would be "inevitable" to peel off the US US department.These claims were challenged.

Judge Ginsberg argued that the law was "absolutely prohibited" by the company's "current control arrangement", not the company itself.He also said that the law is aimed at a group of companies controlled by so -called foreign opponents, not just Tiktok.

Constitution Rights

Tiktok content creator representative, Jeffrey Fisher, said the bill may hinder the constitutional rights that they chose editors and publishing platforms, such as Tiktok under the current ownership.

TIKTOK creator TIKTOK creator Tiffany Cianci live broadcast outside the hearing to update the lawsuit process to the audience.

She has a total of 65,000 people watching her Tiktok live broadcast.

"The American people care about this problem," she said, "They are concerned because they are worried about losing something."

Ms. Jiang Qi added that politicians were still using this platform to vote on this platform during the presidential election in 2024. It was really a "pseudo -gentleman", and it also made herself doubt about security issues as the core of the bill.

"If they are really dangerous, they will not appear on this platform at all," she said.Daniel Tenny, a lawyer of the US Department of Justice, refuted Tiktok's statement on its data stored in the United States.

"This is really no controversy. The recommendation engine is beating by bytes instead of Tiktok's maintenance, development and writing," he said, "This is not the word of Americans in the United States -this is a Chinese engineer from China from China from ChinaVictory " Fisher said that the posts on the American platform are all Americans's remarks, "at most it can be displayed by a foreign company."In addition to data concerns, officials and legislators also expressed concern about China's use of Tiktok to the Americans.

However, the first amendment to the US Constitution allows free and sacred speech to be inviolable. The supporters of this amendment say that the bill of "non -sale is banned" will be a gift for dictatorships around the world.

Wang Xiangong (Sound, Xiangnong Wang), a lawyer at the Knight First Amendment Research Institute of Columbia University, said that autocratic rights around the world may use this. "New restrictions to find reasons. "

"Significance"

But James Lewis at the Washington Strategy and International Research Center said the drafting of the law was affordable.

"The subject of Tiktok was very powerful," Lewis said.> "The key is whether the court accepts requesting asset stripping and does not limit the freedom of speech."

Mr. Lewis added that courts usually obey the president's opinion on national security issues.Regardless of how the Court of Appeal, most experts believe that the case may last for at least months.

Gautam Hans, a jurisdiction professor of law, said that there will be the above no matter what the decision is.He said that the government's ability to legislate and supervision in national security is "important".

"They can't let the court restrict this."

But he added that these issues are also "life -death" for TIKTOK. The company said that the company cannot peel off the assets, so there is no choice but to close it.

Mike Proulx, vice president and research director of Ferrster Market Consultation (Forrester), added that this "significant" case may continue to the US Supreme Court.