The Biden administration on Friday maintained that it will not actively enforce a federal law set to ban the Chinese-owned social media app TikTok, instead punting any action to the incoming Trump administration.

The Supreme Court issued a ruling earlier in the day upholding the looming ban, which is set to go into effect on Sunday.

‘The Administration, like the rest of the country, has awaited the decision just made by the U.S. Supreme Court on the TikTok matter. President Biden’s position on TikTok has been clear for months, including since Congress sent a bill in overwhelming, bipartisan fashion to the President’s desk: TikTok should remain available to Americans, but simply under American ownership or other ownership that addresses the national security concerns identified by Congress in developing this law,’ White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement shortly after the decision was handed down. 

She added: ‘Given the sheer fact of timing, this Administration recognizes that actions to implement the law simply must fall to the next Administration, which takes office on Monday.’

A U.S. official told the Associated Press on Thursday that Biden would not enforce the ban that is set to take effect the day before he is to leave office. Such a move inadvertently leaves the social media app’s fate in the hands of President-elect Donald Trump and his incoming administration. 

‘There is no doubt that, for more than 170 million Americans, TikTok offers a distinctive and expansive outlet for expression, means of engagement, and source of community,’ the Supreme Court wrote in its unsigned Friday ruling. ‘But Congress has determined that divestiture is necessary to address its well-supported national security concerns regarding TikTok’s data collection practices and relationship with a foreign adversary.’

The court continued: ‘For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that the challenged provisions do not violate petitioners’ First Amendment rights. The judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is affirmed.’

Just last year, Congress required that TikTok’s China-based parent company ByteDance divest the company by Jan. 19. The law was subsequently signed by Biden.

When the law was passed, Congress specifically noted concerns over the app’s Chinese ownership, which members said meant the app had the potential to be weaponized or used to amass vast amounts of user data, including from the roughly 170 million Americans who use TikTok.

During oral arguments, Biden administration lawyers argued that the app’s Chinese ownership posed a ‘grave’ national security risk to American users. TikTok’s lawyers, on the other hand, argued that such a ban restricted free speech protections under the First Amendment.

First Amendment challenges must be analyzed under strict scrutiny, which places a higher burden of proof on the government when attempting to justify the constitutionality of a law. In this case, the First Amendment protections in question must be crafted to serve a compelling government interest, narrowly tailored to achieve that interest.

Fox News Digital’s Breanne Deppisch contributed to this report. 

The Supreme Court on Friday upheld a federal law that would ban the Chinese-owned social media platform TikTok just two days before the bipartisan divestiture law is slated to take effect.

‘There is no doubt that, for more than 170 million Americans, TikTok offers a distinctive and expansive outlet for expression, means of engagement, and source of community,’ the court wrote in the unsigned ruling. ‘But Congress has determined that divestiture is necessary to address its well-supported national security concerns regarding TikTok’s data collection practices and relationship with a foreign adversary. 

‘For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that the challenged provisions do not violate petitioners’ First Amendment rights. The judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is affirmed.’

There were no noted dissents.

At issue was the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, a law passed by Congress last April with wide bipartisan support. The law gave TikTok nine months to either divest from its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, or be removed from U.S.-based app stores and hosting services. 

In passing the law, Congress cited concerns over the app’s Chinese ownership, which members said meant the app had the potential to be weaponized or used to amass vast amounts of user data, including from the roughly 170 million Americans who use TikTok.

TikTok, ByteDance and several users of the app swiftly sued to block the ban in May, arguing the legislation would suppress free speech for the millions of Americans who use the platform. After a lower court upheld the ban, the Supreme Court agreed to hear TikTok’s emergency request to either block or pause implementation of the law under a fast-track timeline just nine days before the ban was slated to go into effect.

During oral arguments, lawyers for the Biden administration reiterated the argument that TikTok’s Chinese ownership poses a ‘grave’ national security risk for American users. 

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar cited risks that China could weaponize the app, including by manipulating its algorithm to prioritize certain content or by ordering parent company ByteDance to turn over vast amounts of user data compiled by TikTok on U.S. users.

TikTok’s lawyers, meanwhile, sought to frame the case primarily as a restriction on free speech protections under the First Amendment, which the company has argued applies to TikTok’s U.S.-based incorporation.

Noel Francisco, TikTok’s lawyer, argued that the U.S. government has ‘no valid interest in preventing foreign propaganda,’ and reiterated TikTok’s position that the platform and its owners should be entitled to the highest level of free speech protections under the U.S. Constitution. 

Francisco also argued TikTok cannot divest from its Chinese parent company, citing portions of its source code and intellectual property that are housed in China.  

First Amendment protections must be considered under strict scrutiny, which requires the government to sustain a higher burden of proof in justifying a law’s constitutionality. 

More specifically, laws that deal with First Amendment protections must be crafted to serve a compelling government interest, narrowly tailored to achieve that interest.

It’s a difficult legal test to satisfy in court. But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit used it last month in considering the divestiture law, and still voted to uphold it— outlining a way that the Supreme Court could have theoretically considered the case under strict scrutiny and still opted to uphold the law.

During oral arguments at the Supreme Court, several justices appeared skeptical of the company’s core argument, which is that the law is a restriction of speech.

‘Exactly what is TikTok’s speech here?’ Justice Clarence Thomas asked in the first moments of oral arguments in an early sign of the court’s apparent doubt that the law is in fact a First Amendment violation. 

The Supreme Court and its 6-3 conservative majority have been historically deferential to Congress on matters of national security.

The divestiture law in question passed Congress last year under the guidance of top Justice Department officials, who worked directly with House lawmakers to write the bill and help it withstand possible legal challenges.

But it also comes at a time when President-elect Trump has signaled apparent support for the app in recent months.

In December, Trump hosted TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew at his Mar-a-Lago resort, and later told reporters that his incoming administration will ‘take a look at TikTok’ and the divestiture case. 

Attorneys for the president-elect also filed a brief with the Supreme Court last month, asking justices to delay any decision in the case until after Trump’s inauguration on Jan. 20.

The brief did not signal how Trump might act, but cited his request for the court to pause the ban from taking effect until Trump’s inauguration. 

Fox News’ Bill Mears and Shannon Bream contributed to this report.

House Democrats are trying to block President-elect Donald Trump from implementing his wide-ranging tariff plans just days before he is set to take office.

A new bill led by Reps. Suzan DelBene, D-Wash., and Don Beyer, D-Va., and backed by 11 other Democrats, would block Trump from using presidential emergency powers to roll out higher import taxes.

During his campaign, Trump promised to levy a 60% tariff on goods from China and as much as 20% on other countries the U.S. trades with.

He most recently pledged on Truth Social to create an ‘External Revenue Service’ to ‘collect our Tariffs, Duties, and all Revenue that come from Foreign sources.’

Trump and his allies have argued that the plan would bolster American manufacturing while making it more difficult for adversaries like China to ‘export their way out of their current economic malaise,’ as Treasury Secretary nominee Scott Bessent told senators this week.

In theory, the commander in chief is able to bypass Congress to impose sweeping tariffs by declaring an emergency under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

However, Democrats argue the cost of the tariffs would just be passed on to American consumers.

‘The American people have clearly and consistently said that the high cost of living is one of their top concerns,’ DelBene said in a statement. ‘Not only would widespread tariffs drive up costs at home and likely send our economy into recession, but they would likely lead to significant retaliation, hurting American workers, farmers, and businesses.’

Beyer said, ‘Trump’s tariff proposals would misuse emergency authorities to raise prices on the American people, which is unacceptable.’

However, not all Democrats have rejected the plan.

Rep. Jared Golden, D-Maine, a moderate Democrat known to often break from his own party, introduced his own bill this week to impose a universal 10% tariff on all imports.

The 10% level would be reassessed each year, with room for a 5% increase or decrease depending on current U.S. economic conditions.

He argued in a statement to the Maine Morning Star, ‘The universal tariff — along with other policies to support domestic energy production, unions and manufacturing — is designed to reorient our economy from one focused on cheap goods and consumption to one centered on production and innovation.’

Fox News Digital reached out to the Trump transition team for comment on both bills.

President-elect Trump confirmed Friday that he spoke with Chinese President Xi Jinping days before Trump will be inaugurated into office.

‘I just spoke to Chairman Xi Jinping of China. The call was a very good one for both China and the U.S.A.,’ Trump posted on Truth Social.

‘It is my expectation that we will solve many problems together, and starting immediately. We discussed balancing Trade, Fentanyl, TikTok, and many other subjects. President Xi and I will do everything possible to make the World more peaceful and safe!’

China’s state news agency Xinhua had first reported the call, which comes three days before Inauguration Day.

Trump had extended an invitation to Xi to attend the inauguration ceremony on Monday. Incoming White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told Fox News Digital last month Trump hopes to create ‘an open dialogue with leaders of countries that are not just our allies but our adversaries and our competitors, too.’

Xi declined to attend, but he is sending one of his top representatives, Vice President Han Zheng, to Washington, D.C. in his stead. 

China’s foreign ministry made the announcement Friday morning before the two leaders spoke, the South China Morning Post reported.

‘We stand ready to work with the new US government to enhance dialogue and communication, properly manage differences, expand mutually beneficial cooperation, jointly pursue a stable, healthy and sustainable China-US relationship, and find the right way for the two countries to get along,’ the ministry said.

On the campaign trail, Trump threatened to slap steep tariffs on Chinese-made products, renewing fears of a trade war once he assumes office. Now questions abound whether Trump will keep that promise amid deteriorating U.S. relations with Beijing. 

China has been threatening U.S. allies like the Philippines, Japan and Taiwan in the South China Sea. They’ve been accused of sending Chinese nationals to spy on U.S. military bases and sent what was believed to be a surveillance balloon across the U.S.

While Trump ushered in an era of steep trade competition and increased support for Taiwan in his first term, President Biden did not necessarily warm the relationship. 

Trump increased duties by at least 10% during his first term on over $300 billion worth of goods. Biden did not lift those tariffs. 

That was on top of export controls on a variety of items that started under Trump and furthered under Biden.

If Trump successfully raises tariffs to 60%, it could reduce China’s exports by $200 billion and cause a one percentage point drag on GDP, said Zhu Baoliang, a former chief economist at China’s economic planning agency, at a Citigroup conference. 

Last year, China exported about $500 billion worth of goods to the U.S., about 15% of all of its exports. 

Officials with the Trump transition team have reportedly been in talks with the Chinese government ahead of Trump’s inauguration. Trump said earlier this month that he thought he and Xi would ‘probably get along very well.’ 

Xi had called Trump in November to congratulate him on his election win and had warned the U.S. would ‘gain from cooperation and lose from confrontation’ with China.

Fox News Digital’s Morgan Phillips contributed to this report.

Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk is slated to speak at President-elect Donald Trump’s pre-inauguration rally on Sunday, according to a new report. 

Musk, who is poised to lead the newly created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) once Trump takes office, will provide remarks during Trump’s ‘Make America Great Again Victory Rally’ at the Capitol One Arena in Washington, D.C., NBC News reports. 

Other speakers on the agenda for the event include Vice President-elect JD Vance, conservative media personality Megyn Kelly, as well as members of Trump’s immediate family. 

The Trump transition team did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital. 

Musk, who donated millions of dollars to Trump’s presidential campaign, has cozied up to Trump and spoken at official events with the incoming president. For example, Musk delivered remarks at a Trump campaign rally in October at Madison Square Garden in New York City. 

Musk is also expected to influence the incoming administration and is spearheading efforts with tech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy to slash government spending under DOGE. 

DOGE, which is not a federal government agency, aims to eliminate government spending, waste and streamline efficiency and operations. 

It is seeking to cut $2 trillion from the federal government budget through efforts to slash spending, government programs and the federal workforce.

However, Musk recently said eliminating $2 trillion from the federal budget might be too ambitious, and that it was more realistic to cut $1 trillion.

‘I think we’ll try for $2 trillion. I think that’s like the best-case outcome,’ Musk said during tech trade show CES this month in Las Vegas. ‘But I do think that you kind of have to have some overage. I think if we try for $2 trillion, we’ve got a good shot at getting $1 [trillion].’