TikTok requests emergency motion to stop ban from taking effect
Jaque Silva/NurPhoto via Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — TikTok on Monday requested the emergency pause of a law set to ban the popular social media app next month.
A temporary lifting of the measure would afford the Supreme Court time to determine whether it should review the law, the company said in a court filing.
The filling arrives days after TikTok — which boasts more than 170 million U.S. users — lost a challenge against the measure in a federal appeals court.
A pause of the law would afford the Supreme Court time to determine whether it should “review this exceptionally important case,” TikTok said in the court filing on Monday.
The law would impose a nationwide ban of TikTok on Jan. 19, 2025, unless the company finds a different owner.
The ban would take effect one day before the inauguration of President-elect Donald Trump, who has signaled that he would seek to reverse a possible ban.
The legal pause would also allow the Trump administration an opportunity to decide its approach to TikTok, the company’s legal filing said.
TikTok had challenged the law on First Amendment grounds, arguing that a potential ban would deny American users access to a popular venue for public expression. Attorneys for the company also disputed claims that the app poses a national security risk.
In a ruling on Friday, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit rejected TikTok’s bid to overturn the law.
The federal court found merit in security concerns about potential data collection or content manipulation undertaken by the Chinese government.
Each of those two concerns “constitutes an independently compelling national security interest,” the court opinion said. The court cited previous instances in which the Chinese government had pursued data, noting the government’s use of relationships with Chinese-owned businesses.
The China-based app has faced growing scrutiny from government officials over fears that user data could fall into the possession of the Chinese government and the app could be weaponized by China to spread misinformation. TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, has denied those claims.
There is little evidence that TikTok has shared U.S. user data with the Chinese government or that the Chinese government has asked the app to do so, cybersecurity experts previously told ABC News.
In a statement on Monday, TikTok urged the Supreme Court to intervene on its behalf.
“The Supreme Court has an established historical record of protecting Americans’ right to free speech, and we expect they will do just that on this important constitutional issue,” the company said. “Unfortunately, the TikTok ban was conceived and pushed through based upon inaccurate, flawed and hypothetical information, resulting in outright censorship of the American people.”
(WASHINGTON) — Tariff threats voiced by President-elect Donald Trump this week rippled through global stocks and triggered warnings from U.S. retail executives about the risk of higher prices.
Former President George W. Bush, who congratulated Trump a day after the election, has not commented on Trump’s remarks, in keeping with a low public profile. As recently as 2021, however, Bush criticized trade barriers, lamenting the GOP under Trump as “isolationist, protectionist.”
Trump’s support for tariffs and skepticism toward global trade departs from previous Republican presidents spanning the past four decades.
Presidents Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, and his father, George H.W. Bush, each venerated free trade, though in some cases they put forward policies similar to Trump’s protectionist proposals.
“Trump is not talking about free trade,” John Hanke, a professor of applied economics at Johns Hopkins University and a former senior economist on the Council of Economic Advisers under Reagan. “Trump’s rhetoric is completely different.”
In response to ABC News’ request for comment, the Trump transition team said his tariff plans would boost the U.S. economy.
“In his first term, President Trump instituted tariffs against China that created jobs, spurred investment, and resulted in no inflation. President Trump will work quickly to fix and restore an economy that puts American workers by re-shoring American jobs, lowering inflation, raising real wages, lowering taxes, cutting regulations, and unshackling American energy,” Trump transition spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said.
Trump late Monday said he would charge Mexico and Canada with a 25% tariff on all products coming into the United States until action is taken by those countries to stem illegal immigration and the overflow of drugs across the border.
For China, Trump said that he’d impose an additional 10% tariff on products coming to the U.S.
The declarations of trade hostility echoed vows made by Trump on the campaign trail.
Speaking at the Economic Club of Chicago in October, Trump called “tariff” the “most most beautiful word in the dictionary.”
Tariffs as high as 2,000% would safeguard key U.S. industries, such as auto manufacturing, Trump said. In the absence of tariffs, Trump added, it’s “going to be the end of Michigan.”
The favorable tone toward protectionist policies contrasts with rhetoric voiced by Trump’s Republican predecessors.
Reagan, who served in the latter years of the Cold War in the 1980s, invoked free trade as a weapon in the fight against authoritarian adversaries abroad and perceived demagogues at home.
“Our peaceful trading partners are not our enemies; they are our allies,” then-President Ronald Reagan said in 1988, after signing a free trade agreement with Canada.
“We should beware of the demagogues who are ready to declare a trade war against our friends — weakening our economy, our national security, and the entire free world — all while cynically waving the American flag,” Reagan added.
The elder Bush, who had served as Reagan’s vice president, adopted a similar posture toward trade.
As president, George H.W. Bush sought to improve trade ties with China, and he helped establish the World Trade Organization, an international body that aims to facilitate global trade through a shared set of regulations.
In the early 1990s, Bush negotiated the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA, a trade pact between the U.S., Mexico and Canada.
“Free trade throughout the Americas is an idea whose time has come,” Bush said at a ceremony promoting NAFTA in December 1992.
“This century’s epic struggle between totalitarianism and democracy is over. It’s dead. Democracy has prevailed,” he added. “Today, we see unfolding around the world a revolution of hope and courage, propelled by the aspiration of ordinary people for freedom and a better life.”
The deal was ratified under Bush’s successor, President Bill Clinton, a Democrat.
During his first presidential campaign in 2016, Trump sharply criticized NAFTA, which had drawn criticism for allowing manufacturers to relocate plants abroad and lay off U.S. workers.
Weeks before the 2016 presidential election, Trump described NAFTA as “the single worst trade deal ever approved in this country.”
Like Reagan and his father, George W. Bush voiced support for free trade while in office. Since then, he has continued to back global commerce and oppose trade barriers.
“Since World War II, America has encouraged and benefited from the global advance of free markets, from the strength of democratic alliances, and from the advance of free societies,” George W. Bush said in 2017.
“Free nations are less likely to threaten and fight each other. And free trade helped make America into a global economic power,” George W. Bush added.
Despite their rhetoric, Trump’s predecessors within the Republican Party put forward some policies that resembled his proposals this week.
Reagan slapped 45% tariffs on Japanese motorcycles, and 100% tariffs on some Japanese electronics, seeking to counter that nation’s economic rise and bolster domestic industry. Reagan also placed an annual quota on the allowable number of imported Japanese cars.
“There was a huge gap between rhetoric and reality,” Hanke, the former Reagan administration economist, told ABC News.
For his part, George W. Bush attempted to protect the U.S. steel industry by placing tariffs on some steel imports. Facing pushback from the World Trade Organization and threats of retaliation from other countries, he removed the tariffs after 18 months.
(WASHINGTON) — The Federal Reserve on Thursday will announce its latest decision on the direction of interest rates, setting the path for borrowing costs just two days after the victory of President-Elect Donald Trump.
The Fed cut its benchmark interest rate a half of a percentage point in September, dialing back its yearslong fight against inflation and delivering relief for borrowers saddled with high costs.
The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), a policymaking body at the Fed, has forecast further interest rate cuts.
By the end of 2024, interest rates will fall another half of a percentage point from their current level of between 4.75% and 5%, according to FOMC projections. Interest rates will drop another percentage point over the course of 2025, the projections further indicated.
The central bank is widely expected to cut interest rates by another quarter of a percentage point when it meets on Thursday, according to the CME FedWatch Tool, a measure of market sentiment.
In recent months, the U.S. has inched closer to a “soft landing,” in which inflation returns to normal and the economy averts a recession.
Government data released last week showed robust economic growth over a recent three-month period, alongside a continued cooldown of inflation.
U.S. hiring slowed in October, but fallout from hurricanes and labor strikes likely caused an undercount of the nation’s workers, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data on Friday showed.
Since 2021, the Fed has sought to rein in inflation with elevated interest rates. Even after the Federal Reserve cut its benchmark interest in September, it still stands at a historically high level.
Inflation has cooled dramatically from a peak of about 9% in 2022, hovering right near the Federal Reserve’s target rate of 2%.
The trajectory of inflation could shift in the coming months. Trump’s proposals of heightened tariffs and the mass deportation of undocumented immigrants are widely expected to raise consumer prices, experts previously told ABC News.
To be sure, the Fed says it bases its decisions on economic conditions and operates as an independent government body.
When asked previously about the 2024 election at a press conference in Washington, D.C., in December, Powell said, “We don’t think about politics.”
The election of Trump appears to have delivered a boost for the stock market. The U.S. stock market soared at the open of trading on Wednesday, just hours after Trump declared victory.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average climbed more than 1,300 points, amounting to a nearly 3% rise in the index. The S&P 500 and the tech-heavy Nasdaq each jumped more than 2%.
Shares of Tesla, the electric vehicle company headed by Trump ally Elon Musk, spiked about 14.5% in early trading on Wednesday.
(NEW YORK) — Tens of thousands of dockworkers are set to strike as soon as Oct. 1, potentially snarling dozens of ports along the East and Gulf coasts with major implications for the U.S. economy.
A shutdown of the ports would cost the economy up to $4.5 billion each day, according to a report from JPMorgan senior equity analyst Brian Ossenbeck.
The East and Gulf Coast ports account for more than half of U.S. container imports, facilitating the transport of everything from toys to fresh fruit to nuclear reactors, Ossenbeck found.
A strike lasting only a handful of days would wreak little damage, but a prolonged work stoppage of several weeks or months could drive up prices for some goods and cause layoffs at manufacturers as raw materials dry up, experts said.
“The supply chain will start to get shocked after a couple of weeks,” Adam Kamins, a senior director of economic research at Moody’s Analytics, told ABC News. “If it gets beyond that, we’ll start to see some much more signifiant implications.”
The International Longshoreman’s Association, the union representing 45,000 East and Gulf Coast dockworkers, did not respond to ABC News’ request for comment. The U.S. Maritime Alliance, an organization bargaining on behalf of the dockworkers’ employers, declined to respond to a request for comment.
President Joe Biden retains the power to prevent or halt a strike under the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act. Trade organizations sent a letter to Biden earlier this month urging the White House to intervene.
The White House did not respond to ABC News’ request for comment about the economic implications of a potential strike. In response to a different reporter’s request on Friday for comment, a White House spokesperson said the Biden administration does not intend to intervene but is “monitoring and assessing” ways to address the potential impact of a strike for the nation’s supply chain.
“The president supports collective bargaining and believe it’s the best way for American workers and employers to come to agreement. We continue to encourage the parties to continue negotiating towards an agreement that benefits all sides and prevents any disruption. We’ve never invoked Taft-Hartley to break a strike and are not considering doing so now,” White House spokesperson Robyn Patterson said in part.
Here’s what to know about how a dockworker strike could impact consumers and workers:
Higher inflation
A prolonged East and Gulf Coast port strike could moderately increase prices for a range of goods, experts told ABC News.
That upward pressure on prices would result from a shortage of products caught up in the supply chain blockage, leaving too many dollars chasing after too few items, they added.
Food products are especially vulnerable to an uptick in prices, since food could spoil if suppliers sent the products ahead of time to avert the strike impact as they have done for some other goods, Kamins said.
As much as 75% of the nation’s imported bananas come through ports on the East and Gulf Coasts, threatening the supply of a highly perishable product, Jason Miller, a professor of supply-chain management at Michigan State University, told ABC News.
“It’s simply infeasible to route those bananas through the West Coast ports,” Miller said.
A significant share of the nation’s imported auto parts come through the ports at issue in a potential strike, which could cause an increase in car prices if the strike persists for more than two weeks, Kamins said.
Potential price increases would likely be moderate but may nudge the Federal Reserve to hold off on interest rate cuts expected in the coming months, Kamins added.
“We’re not talking about prices skyrocketing by any means,” Kamins said, but even a few tenths of a percentage point tacked onto the annual inflation rate could scare off the Fed. “If it has an outsized effect on the consumer’s psyche and the Fed’s psyche, that in and of itself creates recession risks,” he said.
Manufacturing disruption and layoffs
A strike lasting a matter of months could cause a shortage of raw materials that brings some manufacturing activity to a halt, leading to layoffs at affected plants as well as in related industries such as shipping and logistics, some experts said.
“If there aren’t shipments to pick up, it would have a boomerang effect across the whole nation,” Bill Stankiewicz, owner of Georgia-based logistics consulting company Savannah Supply Chain, told ABC News.
At the heart of a potential disruption, shortages of parts would prevent manufacturers from assembling and shipping out final products, Miller said. The auto sector would be heavily impacted but the slowdown would affect “all types of industries,” he added.
“If you start having a very extended strike you’ll be looking at temporary layoffs because plants can’t get their parts,” Miller said.
Kamins echoed concern about manufacturing workers. Still, such an outcome would only result from a prolonged strike, he said.
In 2002, a strike among workers at West Coast ports lasted 11-days before then-President George W. Bush invoked the Taft-Hartley Act and ended the standoff. However, the last time East and Gulf Coast workers went on strike, in 1977, the work stoppage lasted seven weeks.
“Conceivably, some manufacturing workers could be affected,” Kamins said. “That would be many months down the road. I’d be surprised if it gets to that point.”
ABC News’ Elizabeth Schulze contributed to this report.
