MISSOULA, Mont. (Legal Newsline) - A federal judge has put a hold on enforcement of Montana's ban on TikTok.
Federal judge Donald Molloy on Nov. 30 sided with the social media company and one of its users, granting a preliminary injunction against the law's effective date of Jan. 1. The start date will be pushed back until a final determination of the plaintiffs' claims is made.
Molloy entered the injunction because the plaintiffs have shown a likelihood of success.
"Although TikTok's business harms argument is not entirely persuasive, the State has not substantively rebutted it," Molloy wrote.
"TikTok's business harms are irreparable both because they are economic in nature and because they constitute a damage to goodwill of the business. SB 419 is damaging to the company's goodwill by painting them as both disreputable and controlled by China."
TikTok sued the State in May in Missoula federal court, claiming the law violates the First Amendment. The ban prohibits the operation of TikTok throughout the state and imposes a $10,000 penalty on individuals who access it, which is "extraordinary and unprecedented," it claims.
TikTok on July 5 moved for a preliminary injunction, citing the 2017 invalidation by a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court of a North Carolina law that aimed to prohibit sex offenders from accessing social media.
"SB 419 is more pernicious," TikTok's motion says. "Thousands of Montanans - including ranchers, homemakers, students, veterans and small business owners like Plaintiffs - rely on TikTok to express themselves, share ideas and promote their endeavors."
Montana's concern with TikTok is China accessing data about users, claiming it exposes minors to harmful online content too. TikTok claims it takes substantial measures to protect the privacy and security of its users by storing all U.S. user data in the United States.
Users of TikTok would be irreparably harmed by the law starting before its constitutionality is determined, Molloy wrote.
"In shutting off TikTok, the Legislature has both harmed User Plaintiffs' First Amendment rights and cut off a stream of income on which many rely," he wrote.