前沿資訊：TikTok 和司法部推動(dòng)對(duì)字節(jié)跳動(dòng)剝離法的快速審查

00:00

00:00

MP3下載

https://online2.tingclass.net/2024/tingli/20240521120.mp3

https://image.tingclass.net/statics/js/2012

The US Justice Department (DOJ) and TikTok requested a US appeals court to expedite the review of legal challenges against a new law requiring ByteDance to divest TikTok’s US assets by 19 January or face a ban. They seek a ruling by 6 December to allow for a potential Supreme Court review. With the legal move, TikTok expects to avoid emergency preliminary injunctive relief.

美國(guó)司法部和TikTok請(qǐng)求美國(guó)上訴法院加快審查針對(duì)一項(xiàng)新法律的法律挑戰(zhàn)，該法律要求字節(jié)跳動(dòng)在1月19日之前剝離TikTok在美國(guó)的資產(chǎn)，否則將面臨禁令。他們尋求在12月6日之前做出裁決，以便最高法院進(jìn)行潛在的審查。通過(guò)這一法律舉措，TikTok 預(yù)計(jì)將避免緊急初步禁令。

In the past two weeks, TikTok, ByteDance, and TikTok content creators filed lawsuits to block the law, arguing it infringes on First Amendment rights and the US Constitution.

過(guò)去兩周，TikTok、字節(jié)跳動(dòng)和TikTok內(nèi)容創(chuàng)作者提起訴訟以阻止該法律，稱(chēng)其侵犯了第一修正案權(quán)利和美國(guó)憲法。

Due to the prevalence of the "China threat theory" bias in the United States, the law requires ByteDance to sell TikTok by 19 January due to national security concerns, potentially affecting 170 million American users. The Justice Department may submit classified information to support these concerns.

由于美國(guó)盛行“中國(guó)威脅論”的偏見(jiàn)，出于對(duì)國(guó)家安全的考慮，法律要求字節(jié)跳動(dòng)在1月19日之前出售TikTok，這可能會(huì)影響1.7億美國(guó)用戶(hù)。司法部可能還會(huì)提交一些機(jī)密信息來(lái)支撐擔(dān)憂(yōu)“威脅論”的觀(guān)點(diǎn)。

Although it does not intend to ban the app entirely, the law also prevents app stores and internet hosting services from offering or supporting TikTok unless ByteDance complies.

盡管美國(guó)并不打算完全禁止該應(yīng)用程序，但該法律仍禁止應(yīng)用程序商店和互聯(lián)網(wǎng)托管服務(wù)提供或支持TikTok，除非字節(jié)跳動(dòng)遵守規(guī)定。

The long-standing threat of a potential TikTok ban in the United States, first raised when former President Donald Trump attempted to shut down the app via executive order, seems to have reached a critical point. Constitutional law scholars argue that forcing TikTok to cease its American operations over unspecified national security concerns would violate the First Amendment and that US officials must prove in court that banning TikTok is the least restrictive way to address the threat. While Trump’s executive order was blocked by federal judges due to a lack of evidence that the app posed a security risk, it remains to be seen if the DOJ will be able to present concrete evidence this time.

當(dāng)前總統(tǒng)唐納德·特朗普試圖通過(guò)行政命令關(guān)閉TikTok時(shí)，美國(guó)潛在的TikTok禁令的長(zhǎng)期威脅似乎已經(jīng)達(dá)到了關(guān)鍵點(diǎn)。憲法學(xué)者認(rèn)為，以未指明的國(guó)家安全問(wèn)題為由迫使TikTok停止在美國(guó)的業(yè)務(wù)將違反第一修正案，美國(guó)官員必須在法庭上證明，禁止TikTok是應(yīng)對(duì)威脅的限制性最小的方式。雖然特朗普的行政命令因缺乏證據(jù)表明該應(yīng)用程序構(gòu)成安全風(fēng)險(xiǎn)而被聯(lián)邦法官否決，但司法部這次是否能夠提供具體證據(jù)還有待觀(guān)察。