U.S. TikTok ban case pits free speech vs. national security. Which will win?

A legal faceoff between TikTok and the U.S. government over a law that could ban the social media platform in the country is pitting two major principles against each other: national security versus free speech.

In a more than two-hour appearance before a federal appeals court in Washington earlier this week, TikTok argued the U.S. law that forces the platform to sever ties with its China-based parent company ByteDance or face a ban by mid-January is unconstitutional under the First Amendment.

“The law before this court is unprecedented and its effect would be staggering,” Andrew Pincus, the lawyer arguing for TikTok and ByteDance, told the three-judge panel on Monday.

He warned that a ban would violate the free-speech rights of not only an American entity, but also the 170 million Americans who use the platform — including content creators and businesses that rely on TikTok for their livelihoods.

Daniel Tenny, an attorney for the U.S. Justice Department, countered the government is concerned that TikTok’s Chinese ownership makes the valuable user data it collects susceptible to falling into the hands of the Chinese government through coercion. While many other companies collect and share data for targeted marketing and tailoring users’ experiences, he argued TikTok is a unique case.

“The problem is that same data is extremely valuable to a foreign adversary trying to compromise the security of the United States,” he said.

The judges will now have to weigh a decision in the case, which will likely take weeks. TikTok and the Justice Department have asked for a ruling by Dec. 6, which could allow the U.S. Supreme Court to consider any appeal before the Jan. 19 deadline for ByteDance to sell TikTok’s U.S. assets.

The question now