Report
tiktok-v-garland-pet
60 authorities checked
How this report was built
AI inference calls
0
Citations parsed
60
Sources queried
3
Cornell LII, CourtListener, govinfo
Source texts retrieved
49
Quotes checked
160
134 matched in source text
Verification runs deterministically against authoritative public databases. Your brief is not sent to OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, or any other third-party model.
Click any citation below to see how we verified it, the matched source, and a per-quote breakdown.
§Authorities
|
1 CASES Agency for Int'l Dev. v. All. for Open Soc'y Int'l, Inc., 591 U.S. 430 (2020) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· medium confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 3 of 3 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Agency for Int'l Development v. Alliance for Open Society”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“remain[s] legally distinct,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“do[es] not ask this Court to pierce the corporate veil”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“invoke any other relevant exception”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
2 Arcara v. Cloud Books, Inc., 478 U.S. 697 (1986) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Arcara v. Cloud Books, Inc”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“was directed at unlawful conduct having nothing to do with books or other expressive activity.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
3 Arizona Free Enter. Club's Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett, 564 U.S. 721 (2011) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· medium confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A
· no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Arizona Free Enterprise Club's Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
4 Ashcroft v. ACLU, 542 U.S. 656 (2004) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· medium confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“shoulder its full constitutional burden of proof.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
5 Barr v. Am. Ass'n of Pol. Consultants, Inc., 591 U.S. 610 (2020) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A
· no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Barr v. American Assn. of Political Consultants, Inc”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
6 Boy Scouts of Am. v. Dale, 530 U.S. 640 (2000) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 2 of 2 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Boy Scouts of America v. Dale”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“directly and immediately”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“directly and immediately”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
7 Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 2 of 2 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Brandenburg v. Ohio”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“incitement to imminent lawless action,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“mere advocacy”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
8 Brown v. Ent. Merchants Ass'n, 564 U.S. 786 (2011) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Assn”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“[out]weighs”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
9 Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Buckley v. Valeo”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“the concept that government may restrict the speech of some elements of our society in order to enhance the relative voice of others is wholly foreign to the First Amendment….”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
10 Burson v. Freeman, 504 U.S. 191 (1992) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 6 of 6 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Burson v. Freeman”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“restricted zone”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“the evolution of election reform … demonstrate[d]the necessity of restricted areas … around polling places”
Found in the opinion.
“bribery, violence, or intimidation”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“time-tested consensus”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“all 50 States.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“minor geographic limitation”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
11 Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 573 U.S. 682 (2014) brief quality flagged
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· medium confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Brief-quality observations
- A case named 'Sylvia Burwell, Secretary of Health and Human Services v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.' exists in CourtListener at [{'volume': '1', 'reporter': 'U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH)', 'page': '50,341'}, {'volume': '123', 'reporter': 'Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA)', 'page': '621'}, {'volume': '134', 'reporter': 'S. Ct.', 'page': '2751'}, {'volume': '189', 'reporter': 'L. Ed. 2d', 'page': '675'}, {'volume': '2014', 'reporter': 'U.S. LEXIS', 'page': '4505'}, {'volume': '2014', 'reporter': 'WL', 'page': '2921709'}, {'volume': '24', 'reporter': 'Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S', 'page': '965'}, {'volume': '82', 'reporter': 'U.S.L.W.', 'page': '4636'}] (scotus, 2014), but the brief's citation does not match.
How we matched this
The brief's reporter triple is independently confirmed by leagle.com's volume index, and CourtListener's docket index identifies the same case.
12 Citizens United v. FEC, 558 U.S. 310 (2010) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· medium confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 2 of 2 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“less restrictive alternative”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“instrument[] to censor”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
13 City of Austin v. Reagan Nat'l Advert. of Austin, LLC, 596 U.S. 61 (2022) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 2 of 2 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “City of Austin v. Reagan National Advertising of Austin, LLC”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“[i]ntermediate scrutiny”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“narrowly tailored to serve a significant governmental interest.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
14 Holder v. Humanitarian L. Project, 561 U.S. 1 (2010) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· medium confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 14 of 14 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“consists of communicating a message.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“knowingly provid[ing] material support”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“foreign terrorist organization.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“sought to suppress ideas or opinions,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“prohibited 'material support,' which most often does not take the form of speech at all”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“carefully drawn to cover only a narrow category of speech”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“specific findings regarding the serious threat”
Found word-for-word in the opinion. Brief signaled: “(cleaned up)”.
“explicitly reject[ing]”
Found word-for-word in the opinion. Brief signaled: “(cleaned up)”.
“legitimate activities”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“specific findings.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“persuasive evidence.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“[C]oncerns of national security and foreign relations do not warrant [this] abdication of the judicial role.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“considered judgment”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“support to a designated foreign terrorist organization … bolsters [its] terrorist activities.”
Found in the opinion.
15 Kennedy v. Bremerton Sch. Dist., 597 U.S. 507 (2022) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Kennedy v. Bremerton School Dist”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“invented post hoc,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
16 Lamont v. Postmaster Gen., 381 U.S. 301 (1965) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 2 of 2 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Lamont v. Postmaster General”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“communist political propaganda”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“propaganda.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion. Brief signaled: “(cleaned up)”.
17 McCullen v. Coakley, 573 U.S. 464 (2014) brief quality flagged
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· medium confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
0 of 3 located
Brief-quality observations
- A case named 'Eleanor McCullen v. Martha Coakley, Attorney General of Massachusetts' exists in CourtListener at [{'volume': '134', 'reporter': 'S. Ct.', 'page': '2518'}, {'volume': '189', 'reporter': 'L. Ed. 2d', 'page': '502'}, {'volume': '2014', 'reporter': 'U.S. LEXIS', 'page': '4499'}, {'volume': '2014', 'reporter': 'WL', 'page': '2882079'}, {'volume': '24', 'reporter': 'Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S', 'page': '929'}, {'volume': '82', 'reporter': 'U.S.L.W.', 'page': '4584'}] (scotus, 2014), but the brief's citation does not match.
Why we flagged this
- At least one attributed quote wasn't located in the retrieved text.
How we matched this
The brief's reporter triple is independently confirmed by leagle.com's volume index, and CourtListener's docket index identifies the same case.
Quotes attributed to this authority
“consider[] different methods that other jurisdictions have found effective.”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“readily available”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“less intrusive tool[].”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
18 Meese v. Keene, 481 U.S. 465 (1987) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 3 of 3 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Meese v. Keene”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“political propaganda”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“increased attempts by foreign agents at the systematic manipulation of mass attitudes,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“add[ed] requirements to keep our Government and people informed of the nature, source, and extent of political propaganda distributed.”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
19 Minneapolis Star & Tribune Co. v. Minn. Comm'r of Rev., 460 U.S. 575 (1983) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 2 of 2 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Minneapolis Star & Tribune Co. v. Minnesota Commissioner of Revenue”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“singl[ing] out”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“present[] such a potential for abuse”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
20 Moody v. NetChoice, 603 U.S. 707 (2024) flagged
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
16 of 18 located
Why we flagged this
- At least one attributed quote wasn't located in the retrieved text.
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Moody v. NetChoice, LLC”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“may not interfere with private actors' speech”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“improve … the speech market”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“editorial function itself is an aspect of speech.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“Deciding on the third-party speech that will be included in or excluded from a compilation-and then organizing and presenting the included items-is expressive activity.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“combin[es] multifarious voices to create a distinctive expressive offering.”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible. Brief signaled: “(cleaned up)”.
“thus unabashedly control[s]the content that will appear to users.”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“an editorial choice”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“belief[] about which messages are appropriate.”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“expressive choice[]”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“compiling and curating others' speech.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“basic principles”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“do not vary”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“text, images, videos, … or similar content,”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
“platforms [that] make choices about what third-party speech to display and how to display it,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“whose primary purpose is to allow users to post product reviews, business reviews, or travel information and reviews.”
This quote does not appear in the cited opinion's text, but may be a canonical restatement of the opinion — the language appears in another opinion this brief cites.
“State may not interfere”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“private actor[]”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“balance.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
21 Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass'n of U.S., Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S. 29 (1983) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 2 of 2 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Assn. of United States, Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“offer[] an explanation … that runs counter to the evidence”
Found in the opinion.
“entirely fail[] to consider an important aspect of the problem”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
22 Mt. Healthy City Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ. v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274 (1977) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“even in the absence of”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
23 Nat'l Inst. of Fam. & Life Advocs. v. Becerra, 585 U.S. 755 (2018) flagged
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
1 of 2 located
Why we flagged this
- At least one attributed quote wasn't located in the retrieved text.
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“underinclusiveness raises serious doubts about whether the government is in fact pursuing the interest it invokes, rather than disfavoring a particular speaker or viewpoint.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“covered company”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
24 News Am. Pub., Inc. v. FCC, 844 F.2d 800 (D.C. Cir. 1988) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 3 of 3 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “News America Publishing, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, the Committee for Media Diversity, Wilbert A. Tatum, Intervenors”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“a corporation controlled by K. Rupert Murdoch”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“with the precision of a laser beam”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“intersection”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
25 Reed v. Town of Gilbert, 576 U.S. 155 (2015) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 9 of 9 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Reed v. Town of Gilbert”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“[S]trict scrutiny applies”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“egregious form of content discrimination,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“target[s] [the] viewpoint[]”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“often simply a means to control content,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“survive strict scrutiny”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“prove[s]”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“furthers a compelling interest”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“speech restrictions based on the identity of the speaker are all too often simply a means to control content.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion. Brief signaled: “(cleaned up)”.
26 Reno v. ACLU, 521 U.S. 844 (1997) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· medium confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 3 of 3 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“the vast democratic forums of the Internet.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“the absence of any detailed findings by the Congress”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“imposes an especially heavy burden on the Government to explain why a less restrictive provision would not be as effective.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
27 Rumsfeld v. Forum for Acad. & Institutional Rts., Inc., 547 U.S. 47 (2006) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A
· no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights, Inc”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
28 Sable Commc'ns of Cal., Inc. v. FCC, 492 U.S. 115 (1989) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A
· no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Sable Communications of California, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
29 Shaw v. Hunt, 517 U.S. 899 (1996) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· medium confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Shaw v. Hunt”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“the legislature's actual purpose,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion. Brief signaled: “(cleaned up)”.
30 Simon & Schuster, Inc. v. Members of N.Y. State Crime Victims Bd., 502 U.S. 105 (1991) flagged
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
3 of 4 located
Why we flagged this
- At least one attributed quote wasn't located in the retrieved text.
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Simon & Schuster, Inc. v. Members of the New York State Crime Victims Board”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“impos[ed] a financial burden on speakers”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“The First Amendment presumptively places this sort of discrimination beyond the power of the government”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“raises the specter that the government may effectively drive certain ideas or viewpoints from the marketplace.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“the conduct triggering”
Not found in the cited opinion. We tried exact matching, bracketed substitutions, ellipsis-split joins, and punctuation-tolerant matching — none matched.
31 Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc., 564 U.S. 552 (2011) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· medium confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 3 of 3 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“more than an incidental burden”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“on its face and in its practical operation,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“imposes a burden based on the content of speech and the identity of the speaker.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
32 Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Texas v. Johnson”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“is related to expression,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
33 Thompson v. W. States Med. Ctr., 535 U.S. 357 (2002) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 2 of 2 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Thompson v. Western States Medical Center”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“that the Government even considered … alternatives,”
Found — the brief joined separate passages with ellipses (Bluebook R. 5.3).
“even considered”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
34 Turner Broad. Sys., Inc. v. FCC, 512 U.S. 622 (1994) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A
· no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
35 Turner Broad. Sys., Inc. v. FCC, 520 U.S. 180 (1997) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“unrelated to the suppression of free speech.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
36 United States v. O'Brien, 391 U.S. 367 (1968) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “United States v. O'Brien”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“unrelated to the suppression of free expression.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
37 United States v. Playboy Ent. Grp., 529 U.S. 803 (2000) flagged
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
13 of 14 located
Why we flagged this
- At least one attributed quote wasn't located in the retrieved text.
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“The distinction between laws burdening and laws banning speech is but a matter of degree.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“[R]igorous scrutiny”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“an adequate justification”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“contradict[s]basic First Amendment principles.”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“satisf[y]strict scrutiny”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“If a less restrictive alternative would serve the Government's purpose, the legislature must use [it].”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“To do otherwise would be to restrict speech without an adequate justification.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“a plausible, less restrictive alternative”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“a content-based speech restriction”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“the obligation to prove that the alternative will be ineffective.”
The brief's quote matches 95% of the cited opinion, but in separate passages — not as one continuous quote. This typically means the brief either paraphrased inside the quotation marks (Bluebook Rule 5.2 requires brackets for any substitution) or silently omitted intervening text (Bluebook Rule 5.3 requires “. . .” for omissions). Compare the brief's quotation against the cited opinion.
What diverges
brief: …the obligation to prove that the …
opinion: …nts obligation to prove that the …
“usual presumption of constitutionality afforded congressional enactments is reversed.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“hard evidence,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“anecdote and supposition.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“[l]aws designed or intended to suppress or restrict the expression of specific speakers contradict basic First Amendment principles.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
38 Va. Pharmacy Bd. v. Va. Consumer Council, 425 U.S. 748 (1976) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 3 of 3 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“information is not in itself harmful.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“makes for us”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“choice[] between the dangers of suppressing information[] and the dangers of its misuse.”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
39 Williams-Yulee v. Florida Bar, 575 U.S. 433 (2015) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 14 of 14 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Williams-Yulee v. Florida Bar”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“advance[d]the State's compelling interest in preserving public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary,”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“narrow slice of speech”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“aim[ed] squarely at the conduct most likely to undermine public confidence,”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“applie[d] evenhandedly to all judges and judicial candidates,”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“zero exceptions.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“a pretextual motive,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“[U]nderinclusivity raises a red flag”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“can also reveal”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“does not actually advance a compelling interest,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“address[ing] all aspects of a problem in one fell swoop,”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“fail[ing] to regulate vast swaths of conduct that similarly [imperil] [the Government's] asserted interests.”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“no fatal underinclusivity concerns”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“aim[ed] squarely at the conduct most likely to undermine”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“applie[d] evenhandedly to all judges and judicial candidates”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
40 Zauderer v. Off. of Disciplinary Couns. of Sup. Ct. of Ohio, 471 U.S. 626 (1985) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 2 of 2 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Zauderer v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel of the Supreme Court of Ohio”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“disclosure requirements trench much more narrowly”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
“than do flat prohibitions on speech.”
Found word-for-word in the opinion.
41 2024 WL 4996719 flagged
Case exists as cited?
Not verified
Opinion text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Why we flagged this
- No matching case-law record found via CourtListener (citation lookup, docket lookup, name search), court-specific adapters, govinfo, or web search. The citation triple did not appear in any of our case-law databases.
42 AOSI, 591 U.S. at 437 brief quality flagged
Case exists as cited?
Not verified
Opinion text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A
· opinion text unavailable
Brief-quality observations
- Short-form citation used without a preceding full citation in the brief.
Why we flagged this
- We couldn't independently verify this citation against our public sources.
- We couldn't retrieve the source text from any of our public sources.
Why we couldn't check the quotes
We couldn't retrieve any opinion text for this citation from our public sources. The case may only be available on a paid service like Westlaw or Lexis. Without the text, we can't check whether the brief's quotes appear in the opinion.
Quotes attributed to this authority
These quotes have not been verified because the opinion text wasn't available.
TikTok [Inc.].
Not verified: opinion text unavailable.
expressive activity
Not verified: opinion text unavailable.
presenting a curated compilation of speech
Not verified: opinion text unavailable.
associat[ing] for th[at] purpose
Not verified: opinion text unavailable.
are free to choose whether to affiliate with foreign organizations
Not verified: opinion text unavailable.
43 591 U.S. at 439 flagged
Case exists as cited?
Not verified
Opinion text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A
· opinion text unavailable
Why we flagged this
- No matching case-law record found via CourtListener (citation lookup, docket lookup, name search), court-specific adapters, govinfo, or web search. The citation triple did not appear in any of our case-law databases.
- We couldn't retrieve the source text from any of our public sources.
Why we couldn't check the quotes
We couldn't retrieve any opinion text for this citation from our public sources. The case may only be available on a paid service like Westlaw or Lexis. Without the text, we can't check whether the brief's quotes appear in the opinion.
Quotes attributed to this authority
These quotes have not been verified because the opinion text wasn't available.
the First Amendment rights of American organizations
Not verified: opinion text unavailable.
affiliat[ion]
Not verified: opinion text unavailable.
foreign organizations.
Not verified: opinion text unavailable.
44 EMA, 564 U.S. at 799 brief quality flagged
Case exists as cited?
Not verified
Opinion text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A
· opinion text unavailable
Brief-quality observations
- Short-form citation used without a preceding full citation in the brief.
Why we flagged this
- We couldn't independently verify this citation against our public sources.
- We couldn't retrieve the source text from any of our public sources.
Why we couldn't check the quotes
We couldn't retrieve any opinion text for this citation from our public sources. The case may only be available on a paid service like Westlaw or Lexis. Without the text, we can't check whether the brief's quotes appear in the opinion.
Quotes attributed to this authority
These quotes have not been verified because the opinion text wasn't available.
is a demanding standard,
Not verified: opinion text unavailable.
[i]t is rare
Not verified: opinion text unavailable.
narrow tailoring
Not verified: opinion text unavailable.
curtailment of free speech [is] actually necessary.
Not verified: opinion text unavailable.
ambiguous proof.
Not verified: opinion text unavailable.
45 EMA, 564 U.S. at 804 brief quality flagged
Case exists as cited?
Not verified
Opinion text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Brief-quality observations
- Short-form citation used without a preceding full citation in the brief.
46 EMA, 564 U.S. at 802 brief quality flagged
Case exists as cited?
Not verified
Opinion text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A
· opinion text unavailable
Brief-quality observations
- Short-form citation used without a preceding full citation in the brief.
Why we flagged this
- We couldn't independently verify this citation against our public sources.
- We couldn't retrieve the source text from any of our public sources.
Why we couldn't check the quotes
We couldn't retrieve any opinion text for this citation from our public sources. The case may only be available on a paid service like Westlaw or Lexis. Without the text, we can't check whether the brief's quotes appear in the opinion.
Quotes attributed to this authority
These quotes have not been verified because the opinion text wasn't available.
raises serious doubts about whether the government is in fact pursuing the interest it invokes, rather than disfavoring a particular speaker or viewpoint.
Not verified: opinion text unavailable.
47 Congress. EMA, 564 U.S. at 792 brief quality flagged
Case exists as cited?
Not verified
Opinion text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Brief-quality observations
- Short-form citation used without a preceding full citation in the brief.
48 603 U.S. at 740 flagged
Case exists as cited?
Not verified
Opinion text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A
· opinion text unavailable
Why we flagged this
- No matching case-law record found via CourtListener (citation lookup, docket lookup, name search), court-specific adapters, govinfo, or web search. The citation triple did not appear in any of our case-law databases.
- We couldn't retrieve the source text from any of our public sources.
Why we couldn't check the quotes
We couldn't retrieve any opinion text for this citation from our public sources. The case may only be available on a paid service like Westlaw or Lexis. Without the text, we can't check whether the brief's quotes appear in the opinion.
Quotes attributed to this authority
These quotes have not been verified because the opinion text wasn't available.
correct[ing] the mix of speech
Not verified: opinion text unavailable.
socialmedia platforms
Not verified: opinion text unavailable.
very much related to the suppression of free expression.
Not verified: opinion text unavailable.
49 603 U.S. at 741 flagged
Case exists as cited?
Not verified
Opinion text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Why we flagged this
- No matching case-law record found via CourtListener (citation lookup, docket lookup, name search), court-specific adapters, govinfo, or web search. The citation triple did not appear in any of our case-law databases.
50 Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass
· high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A
· no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Whitney v. California”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
51 Pub. L. No. 118-50 clean
Citation exists?
Pass
· medium confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
Pass· 2 of 2 located
How we matched this
Resolved as a non-case authority (statute, rule, or regulation).
View matched page on GovInfo →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“data broker[s]”
Found word-for-word in the source text.
“mak[ing] available personally identifiable sensitive data of a United States individual”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
52 138 Stat. 895 manual verify
Citation exists?
Not verified
Source text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Please verify this one manually
This citation falls outside our automated coverage. Law reviews, treatises, restatements, and legislative packages predating govinfo's collection window don't have a free full-text source we can reliably retrieve. The citation itself looks well-formed; a reviewer with access to HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, or a law library can confirm. This isn't a defect in the citation; it's a coverage gap in our automated sources.
53 28 U.S.C. § 1254 clean
Citation exists?
Pass
· high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· no quotes to check
How we matched this
Matched on Cornell Law's online code (LII).
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
54 22 U.S.C. §§ 611-621 clean
Citation exists?
Pass
· high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· no quotes to check
How we matched this
Matched on Cornell Law's online code (LII).
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
62 Pub. L. No. 118-50 clean
Citation exists?
Pass
· medium confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
Pass· 8 of 8 located
How we matched this
Resolved as a non-case authority (statute, rule, or regulation).
View matched page on GovInfo →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“foreign adversary controlled applications.”
Found word-for-word in the source text.
“foreign adversary controlled application[s].”
Found word-for-word in the source text.
“ByteDance[] Ltd.,”
Found, treating [bracketed] text in the quote as flexible.
“TikTok [Inc.],”
Found word-for-word in the source text.
“present[s] a significant threat to the national security of the United States.”
Found word-for-word in the source text.
“a public notice”
Found word-for-word in the source text.
“public report to Congress”
Found word-for-word in the source text.
“the specific national security concern involved.”
Found word-for-word in the source text.
64 Id. clean
Citation exists?
Pass
· high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A
How we matched this
Constitutional citation.
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
70 22 U.S.C. § 614 clean
Citation exists?
Pass
· high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
Pass· 2 of 2 located
How we matched this
Matched on Cornell Law's online code (LII).
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“conspicuous statement”
Found word-for-word in the source text.
“materials are distributed by the agent on behalf of the foreign principal”
Found word-for-word in the source text.
71 Public Law 118-50 118th manual verify
Citation exists?
Not verified
Source text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in source?
N/A
· no quotes to check
Please verify this one manually
This citation falls outside our automated coverage. Law reviews, treatises, restatements, and legislative packages predating govinfo's collection window don't have a free full-text source we can reliably retrieve. The citation itself looks well-formed; a reviewer with access to HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, or a law library can confirm. This isn't a defect in the citation; it's a coverage gap in our automated sources.
72 Amendment I clean
Citation exists?
Pass
· high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A
How we matched this
Constitutional citation.
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
73 U.S. Const. amend. I clean
Citation exists?
Pass
· high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A
How we matched this
Constitutional citation.
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
§Record & filing references (121)
Citations to filings in this case or its record — appendices, docket entries, pleadings. These aren't published authority, so we don't retrieve or verify them. They're listed here so every citation in the brief is accounted for.
TikTok. JA 58
party filing
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- single[] out
Footnote 7
footnote
not verified
JA 483
appendix
not verified
JA 489
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- For You
JA 504-06, 778
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- TikTok Inc.
JA 504
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- Project Texas,
Petrs. App. 417
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- senior government officials
C.A. Gov't Br. at 35
party filing
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- data,
JA 27
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- TikTok[] Inc. … is a domestic entity
- operat[es] domestically
- [T]he Government [also] does not dispute facts suggesting at least some of the regulated speech involves TikTok's U.S. entities.
- TikTok[] Inc. … is a domestic entity operating domestically
- the fundamental principle of corporate separateness
- [t]he Government suggest[ed] that because TikTok is wholly owned by ByteDance, a foreign company, it has no First Amendment rights.
JA 25
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- reject[ed]
- does not implicate the First Amendment
- akin to Arcara v. Cloud Books, Inc., 478 U.S. 697 (1986).
JA 30
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- to shape the content that American users receive.
- influen[tial],
- justification
- references the content of TikTok's speech.
- the Government's concern with content manipulation
- reference[s]the content of TikTok's speech.
- risk that [China] might shape the content that American users receive
- interfere with our political discourse.
JA 70
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- longstanding regulatory history
- restrictions on foreign control … in the communications arena.
JA 43
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- distort[ing] free speech on an important medium of communication.
- foreign government
JA 1-92
appendix
not verified
JA 32-33
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- risks
JA 650
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- potential risk
- could
JA 31
appendix
not verified
JA 26-27
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- domestic entity operating domestically
- the curation of content on [the platform].
JA 16
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- text, images, videos, … or similar content,
JA 26
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- singles out TikTok … for disfavored treatment,
- The Government concedes, as it must …, that the curation of content on TikTok is a form of speech.
- [E]xpressive activity includes presenting a curated compilation of speech originally created by others.
- [S]ingl[ing] out TikTok … for disfavored treatment,
- [e]nforcement of a generally applicable law unrelated to expressive activity,
- the Act singles out TikTok, which engages in expressive activity, for disfavored treatment,
JA 29-30
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- limit[s] [China's] ability to manipulate content covertly on the TikTok platform
- interfere with our political discourse.
- cannot be justified without reference to the content of the regulated speech,
- reference[s]the content of TikTok's speech.
- China may … covertly manipulate the application's recommendation algorithm to shape the content that the application delivers to American audiences.
JA 32, 58, 65
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- national security risks
- the public record.
Americans. JA 54
party filing
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- covert[ly]
Americans. JA 42
party filing
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- most pressing concern
JA 484
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- domiciled in
JA 485
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- tagging
JA 486-87
appendix
not verified
JA 490-91
appendix
not verified
https://www.premierchristianity.com/real-life/tiktok-is-helpingus-reach-millions-with-the-gospel/13647.article
web source
not verified
https://perma.cc/BSH3-5VYX
web source
not verified
https://perma.cc/DZM7-UNWD
web source
not verified
JA 486
appendix
not verified
JA 487
appendix
not verified
https://perma.cc/5SCL-XNWC
web source
not verified
https://www.washingtonpost.com/
web source
not verified
JA 483-84
appendix
not verified
JA 499
appendix
not verified
JA 493, 499, 506
appendix
not verified
JA 493-94, 497-98
appendix
not verified
JA 479
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- TikTok's approach for dealing with these issues is in line with-and in many respects markedly better than-industry best practices.
JA 628
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- no information that
- coerce[d] ByteDance or TikTok to covertly manipulate the information
- no information
- covertly manipulate the information received by … Americans.
JA 640
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- not reliant on ByteDance and TikTok to date
- engage in … theft of sensitive data
- not reliant on ByteDance and TikTok to date
- theft of sensitive data.
JA 449, 502-04
appendix
not verified
JA 236-338, 426
appendix
not verified
JA 449
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- effectively mitigate[] national security risk associated with
- reliance on multiple trusted third parties,
- complex and thorough technical mitigations,
- unprecedented oversight, monitoring, and very rigorous enforcement mechanisms.
- combination
JA 241, 284
appendix
not verified
JA 247-48
appendix
not verified
JA 267-79
appendix
not verified
JA 308
appendix
not verified
JA 373-74, 410, 512-15
appendix
not verified
Petrs. App. 611-16
appendix
not verified
JA 514-15
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- thousands of ByteDance employees
JA 515
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- several years for an entirely new set of engineers to gain sufficient familiarity with the source code
- need access to custom-made ByteDance software tools.
JA 512-13
appendix
not verified
JA 513-14
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- rich pool of global content
- translates to more users,
- significantly less attractive to global advertisers,
JA 506-07
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- render the TikTok platform inoperable in the United States.
JA 210-11
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- foreign adversary controlled applications
- can be used
- to collect vast amounts of data on Americans, conduct espionage campaigns, and push misinformation, disinformation, and propaganda on the American public.
JA 348
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- exposes children to harmful content,
- trends
JA 229
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- the glorification of Hamas terrorists,
JA 357
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- TikTok videos will be promoting that Taiwan ought to be part of China,
JA 798
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- striking to what degree th[e]narratives [on TikTok] are resonating with young people in America.
JA 353
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- show[ed] dramatic differences in content relative to other social media platforms.
JA 366
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- [i]f you look at the postings on TikTok and the number of mentions of Palestinians relative to other social media sites, it's overwhelmingly so.
JA 124-159
appendix
not verified
JA 472-75
appendix
not verified
JA 24-27, 66
appendix
not verified
JA 27-31
appendix
not verified
JA 32-57
appendix
not verified
JA 66
appendix
not verified
JA 57-64
appendix
not verified
JA 64-65
appendix
not verified
JA 493
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- content moderation,
- publicly available … rules and standards.
JA 497-99
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- content recommendation,
- For You
- match[] users with content they are predicted to like.
JA 499-500
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- promot[es] and filter[s]
- diverse and high-quality content.
JA 10
appendix
not verified
JA 28
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- control by a foreign adversary
- operational relationship
- content recommendation algorithm.
- divest
- not target speech based on its communicative content.
JA 29
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- special characteristic
- designated by the political branches as a foreign adversary controlled application,
JA 30-31
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- wholly consonant with the First Amendment.
JA 40
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- much like
JA 33
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- two national security justifications
- covertly manipulating content on TikTok
- collect[ing] data of and about persons in the United States.
JA 42
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- suppressing propaganda and misinformation,
- [t]he Government's justification in fact concerns the risk of [China] covertly manipulating content on the platform.
- TikTok does not identify any company operating a comparable platform in the United States with equivalent connections to [China].
JA 795
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- hav[e] the[] hearings and then mak[e]the findings directly.
JA 211
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- misinformation, disinformation, and propaganda.
China. JA 217-18
party filing
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- specific videos
- false information,
- shape the content … to suit the interests
JA 54
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- [C]overt manipulation of content is not a type of harm that can be remedied by disclosure.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/17/opinion/social-mediahealth-warning.html
web source
not verified
JA 36
appendix
not verified
JA 211, 218
appendix
not verified
JA 455-56, 461-62, 752
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- the type and amount of data that TikTok collects from U.S. users
JA 339-40
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission
- Chinese e-commerce platforms
- a dominant U.S. market presence
- struggl[ing] to protect user data.
Petrs. App. 633, 637-39
appendix
not verified
JA 459-60
appendix
not verified
JA 52-53
appendix
not verified
JA 440, 464-65
appendix
not verified
JA 49-50
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- the Executive's judgment
JA 773-75
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- did not raise
JA 212
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- foreign adversary controlled.
- Beijing ByteDance Technology,
- Chinese internet technology company headquartered in Beijing
- ultimately owned by the Chinese company ByteDance
JA 462
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- many U.S. companies maintain software and other engineering operations in China.
- controlled by a foreign adversary
JA 24
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- fact[]
- subject to the control of a foreign adversary nation.
JA 47
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- would try to comply if
- ByteDance and TikTok Global have taken action in response to [Chinese] demands to censor content outside of China.
- squarely den[ying]
JA 641-42
appendix
not verified
JA 65
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- public record.
JA 759-60
appendix
not verified
JA 761
appendix
not verified
JA 461
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- U.S. technology companies … have Chineseheadquartered subsidiaries
- face the same theoretical risk that Chinese government officials may seek to compel disclosure of customer or user data.
JA 460
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- it is unlikely that China would seek to compel TikTok to turn over user data for intelligence-gathering purposes,
- more effective and efficient means of obtaining relevant information.
JA 502, 750, 778
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- users' precise locations.
JA 751
appendix
not verified
JA 38-39
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- miss[] the forest for the trees.
JA 722, 727
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- a mistaken notion about the volume of data flow,
- are not consistent with the practical realities of Source Code review.
JA 32-33, 38-41, 47-51
appendix
not verified
JA 58
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- differential treatment
- immediate threat.
Petrs. App. 413-25
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- [f]or years.
JA 789
appendix
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- the executive branch could go back and build a record under the more general provision against [Petitioners] and go back in to court and use that record to achieve the same outcome.
Footnote 1
footnote
not verified
Footnote 2
footnote
not verified
Footnote 3
footnote
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- [S]cores of politicians
Footnote 5
footnote
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- the TikTok election.
Footnote 8
footnote
not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
- such overwhelming support for us to shut down potentially TikTok
Footnote 9
footnote
not verified
Footnote 10
footnote
not verified