Comments on: TikTok Ban Heads To Supreme Court http://www.chrisweigant.com/2025/01/09/tiktok-ban-heads-to-supreme-court/ Reality-based political commentary Wed, 08 Apr 2026 15:35:20 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: BashiBazouk http://www.chrisweigant.com/2025/01/09/tiktok-ban-heads-to-supreme-court/#comment-214658 BashiBazouk Fri, 10 Jan 2025 16:51:40 +0000 http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=25955#comment-214658 It will be interesting to see if they do ban TikTok. There is a lot of speculation that Zuckerberg is bending his knee, putting white on the board, changing fact checking to a community notes model (only in the US) and changing the code of conduct that lgbt can be called mentally ill, crazy or weird but not political groups as a quid pro quo. TikTok gets banned, that a huge competitor for whatsapp and instagram to suddenly just disappear, at least for the US market. Though it could go the way of the porn ban/ID requirements in many red states, that everyone figures out how to use a VPN service... It will be interesting to see if they do ban TikTok. There is a lot of speculation that Zuckerberg is bending his knee, putting white on the board, changing fact checking to a community notes model (only in the US) and changing the code of conduct that lgbt can be called mentally ill, crazy or weird but not political groups as a quid pro quo. TikTok gets banned, that a huge competitor for whatsapp and instagram to suddenly just disappear, at least for the US market. Though it could go the way of the porn ban/ID requirements in many red states, that everyone figures out how to use a VPN service...

]]> By: Kick http://www.chrisweigant.com/2025/01/09/tiktok-ban-heads-to-supreme-court/#comment-214657 Kick Fri, 10 Jan 2025 11:02:24 +0000 http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=25955#comment-214657 <i>Nobody really knows what the court will do. </i> Ain't that the dang truth! Who knew they would actually (barely) have the collective intestinal fortitude to shoot down the ridiculous argument of his lawyers that it would be inconvenient for 34-time convicted felon Donald Trump to be sentenced by the judge of a courtroom wherein a jury of his peers had found Trump guilty on all charges for his crimes against the people of the State of New York? Although, wouldn't it be an exercise in obvious total transparent absolute rubbish if the same SCOTUS who cleared the way for states to force women in America to carry for multiple months and be forced to give birth to their rapist's baby make a finding that it would be inconvenient for a private citizen convicted of 34 felonies by a jury of his peers to attend a sentencing trial via video? I mean, really. Although, would we put it past this SCOTUS to "erase" the New York jury's unanimous decision on all 34 counts of fraud despite the fact that the acts for which Trump was convicted were not official acts as president but based on his business dealings for acts he took as a private citizen and for which his own Department of Justice put his lawyer in prison? No... no, we definitely would not. Nobody really knows what the court will do.

Ain't that the dang truth!

Who knew they would actually (barely) have the collective intestinal fortitude to shoot down the ridiculous argument of his lawyers that it would be inconvenient for 34-time convicted felon Donald Trump to be sentenced by the judge of a courtroom wherein a jury of his peers had found Trump guilty on all charges for his crimes against the people of the State of New York?

Although, wouldn't it be an exercise in obvious total transparent absolute rubbish if the same SCOTUS who cleared the way for states to force women in America to carry for multiple months and be forced to give birth to their rapist's baby make a finding that it would be inconvenient for a private citizen convicted of 34 felonies by a jury of his peers to attend a sentencing trial via video? I mean, really.

Although, would we put it past this SCOTUS to "erase" the New York jury's unanimous decision on all 34 counts of fraud despite the fact that the acts for which Trump was convicted were not official acts as president but based on his business dealings for acts he took as a private citizen and for which his own Department of Justice put his lawyer in prison? No... no, we definitely would not.

]]> By: John M from Ct. http://www.chrisweigant.com/2025/01/09/tiktok-ban-heads-to-supreme-court/#comment-214655 John M from Ct. Fri, 10 Jan 2025 01:33:20 +0000 http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=25955#comment-214655 Reading your summary, I tend to agree: the Supremes are most likely to punt, and put off any actual decision via their usual legal mumbo-jumbo. Now I should know better, I suppose, but I really don't care about this one. Why? Because I've never used TikTok and don't actuallyl know what its deal is. It's just the name of some kind of popular social media app, to me. Reading your summary, I tend to agree: the Supremes are most likely to punt, and put off any actual decision via their usual legal mumbo-jumbo.

Now I should know better, I suppose, but I really don't care about this one. Why? Because I've never used TikTok and don't actuallyl know what its deal is. It's just the name of some kind of popular social media app, to me.

]]>