On Thursday (November 30th) local time, a judge in the United States temporarily banned the ban on the short video app TikTok (international version of Douyin) in Montana, citing possible violations of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and infringement of users’ freedom of speech.
In February this year, the Montana State Legislature proposed a bill to ban TikTok statewide. The bill was passed by both houses of the Montana State Legislature in April and signed into law by the state governor in May. The ban on TikTok in Montana was originally scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2024.
In May, TikTok filed a lawsuit against Montana’s federal district court for an injunction to prevent the ban from being implemented, arguing that it violated companies’ and users’ freedom of speech granted by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. In addition, five TikTok content creators residing in Montana also filed lawsuits in the same court.
Judge Donald Molloy of Missoula Division of Montana’s federal district court issued a preliminary injunction on Thursday temporarily banning Montana from implementing its ban on TikTok. According to the injunction document, until a final ruling is made in this case, Montana’s ban on TikTok shall not take effect.
Molloy wrote in his preliminary injunction that the ban on TikTok violates multiple aspects of constitutional rights and exceeds state authority.
He said: “Without TikTok, users are deprived of their right to communicate using their preferred form of expression; therefore it is appropriate to invoke First Amendment scrutiny.”
Molloy also pointed out that Montana attempted to exercise diplomatic powers held only by federal government and its actions were too broad.
Tiktok responded on Thursday saying they were pleased with Judge Molloy’s decision as hundreds of thousands Montanans can continue expressing themselves through tiktok while maintaining livelihoods and finding communities online.
A spokesperson for Attorney General Austin Knudsen’s office in Montana said that this ruling is a preliminary decision and the analysis may change as the case develops, and the state government will have an opportunity to submit a complete factual record.
Knudsen previously stated that it is possible for this case to be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.