Amicus with Dahlia Lithwick | Law, Justice, and the Courts Episode: "TikTok Is Cooked, Trump Is Sentenced" Release Date: January 11, 2025

In this compelling episode of Amicus, hosted by Dahlia Lithwick, the Slate Podcast delves into two pivotal legal events: the sentencing of former President Donald J. Trump and the Supreme Court's decision on the TikTok ban. Co-host Mark Joseph Stern and law professor Gautam Hans join Dahlia to unpack the intricate legal battles that have captured national attention.

1. Donald Trump's Sentencing: A Complex Outcome

Timestamp: [02:26] – [05:34]

The episode opens with the courtroom sentencing of Donald Trump by Judge Juan Merchan at his Manhattan courtroom. Trump was convicted on 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree. Despite the severity of the charges, Trump received an unconditional discharge, meaning he faces no jail time, fines, or probation.

Mark Joseph Stern highlights the unprecedented nature of this sentence:

"This was in many ways a huge defeat for Donald Trump. ... officially, formally, and at long last got a rap sheet that will follow him into the White House."
[03:31]

Dahlia Lithwick criticizes the Supreme Court's role in the sentencing, expressing frustration over the justices' narrow vote:

"It's a blast of reason from five justices, a blast of crazy from the four dissenters."
[07:02]

The discussion underscores the tension between upholding the rule of law and the perceived leniency towards a former president, raising questions about accountability and the integrity of the judicial system.

2. Supreme Court Case: TikTok Ban and First Amendment Implications

Timestamp: [05:34] – [59:16]

The core of the episode examines the Supreme Court's expedited handling of the TikTok ban, a law enacted by Congress in early 2024 amid national security concerns over TikTok's Chinese ownership and data practices.

a. Background and Legislative Intent

Mark Joseph Stern provides a comprehensive overview:

"The law sort of talks about foreign adversaries and social media apps ... requires a divestiture of the company by January 19, 2025."
[19:07]

This legislation aimed to mitigate potential data security threats by mandating TikTok's divestiture from its Chinese parent company, ByteDance. If TikTok fails to comply, the app faces an immediate ban.

b. Legal Challenges and Supreme Court Dynamics

Both TikTok and its user base, including content creators, challenged the ban, citing First Amendment rights and arguing that the law was overly restrictive and not a general solution to data privacy concerns.

Dahlia Lithwick reflects on the Supreme Court's swift decision to hear the case:

"The court is also poised to decide whether you are going to literally be able to open TikTok in eight days time."
[02:49]

Despite the D.C. Circuit's unanimous decision favoring the ban, the Supreme Court's 5-4 split—with Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett siding with the liberal justices—led to the implementation of the ban. The dissenting justices, including Samuel Alito, argued that the law was an overreach infringing on free speech.

c. First Amendment Concerns and National Security

The conversation delves deep into the First Amendment implications, debating whether TikTok's actions constitute protected speech or an unregulated platform that can be weaponized by foreign entities.

Gautam Hans emphasizes the complexity:

"This is a content moderation case that is about not liking the speaker ... we don't have to think about analogies to old speech cases."
[42:16]

Mark Joseph Stern critiques the Supreme Court's handling:

"There was very little discussion about slippery slope ... just convert the restriction on ByteDance's ownership ... into a restriction on TikTok speech."
[34:43]

The hosts express concern over the lack of thorough judicial deliberation, fearing that the decision sets a precarious precedent for future cases where national security and free speech collide.

d. Future Implications and User Impact

As the ban takes effect, the discussion turns to its practical consequences for millions of TikTok users and content creators:

Dahlia Lithwick warns:

"I think it will die fairly quickly ... start making the transition if you haven't already."
[57:00]

Mark Joseph Stern adds:

"We have over 100 million people who use it monthly ... switch does have First Amendment costs."
[58:24]

The episode concludes with reflections on the Supreme Court's role in balancing national security with constitutional freedoms, highlighting the ongoing debate about the limits of government intervention in digital platforms.

Notable Quotes

• Mark Joseph Stern on Trump's sentence:

  "At this time, I impose that sentence to cover all 34 counts. Sir, I wish you Godspeed as you assume your second term in office."
  [03:16]

• Dahlia Lithwick on the Supreme Court's decision:

  "The majority decided we're not going to take that step. It gave these two reasons... it was a blast of reason from five justices, a blast of crazy from the four dissenters."
  [06:36]

• Gautam Hans on First Amendment challenges:

  "This is a content moderation case that is about not liking the speaker ... we don't have to think about analogies to old speech cases."
  [42:16]

Conclusion

This episode of Amicus offers a nuanced exploration of high-stakes legal battles that shape the American socio-political landscape. Through insightful analysis and expert commentary, Dahlia, Mark, and Gautam navigate the complexities of political accountability and constitutional rights, providing listeners with a comprehensive understanding of these landmark cases.

For More Information:

• Subscribe to Amicus: Available on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.
• Join Slate Plus: Access exclusive legal analysis and ad-free listening by subscribing at slate.com/amicusplus.