TikTok in court on 16 September 2024in an try and overturn a law that may force the video app to separate from its China-based parent company or ban it within the US

During their appearance before a panel of judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, TikTok lawyers said the imposition of such a The ban would have “shocking“ Consequences for freedom of expression.

The trial is the most recent development in an extended saga surrounding the fate of an app that is especially popular amongst young Americans but that many politicians in Washington fear poses a security risk.

Whatever the consequence of oral arguments from lawyers for the U.S. government on one side and TikTok and its parent company ByteDance on the opposite, it’s unlikely to be the tip of the story. Many analysts expect the case to find yourself within the Supreme Court.

But why is TikTok so controversial? Are the claims that it poses a national security risk valid? And what are the implications of the case without cost speech? The Conversation's writers answer these questions and more.

1. An agent of the Chinese state?

Politicians who need to ban TikTok, or not less than cut its ties to China, fear that the app provides a way for the Chinese Communist Party to influence Americans or use their data for malicious purposes. But how much influence does the Chinese government have over TikTok? That's the query addressed by Shaomin Li, a scholar of China's political economy and economics at Old Dominion University.

Li explains that the connection between TikTok, ByteDance and the Chinese Communist Party is nuanced — it's not simply a case of officials in Beijing telling ByteDance to leap and the parent company dictating how high its subsidiary should jump. Rather, as with all firms in China, employees are subject to certain obligations in the case of promoting national interests. In China, private firms like ByteDance operate as joint ventures with the state.

“Regardless of whether ByteDance has formal ties to the party, there is a tacit understanding that management works for two bosses: the company's investors and, more importantly, its political overseers who represent the party,” Li writes. “But most importantly, when the interests of the two bosses collide, the party wins.”

---

Read more: Is TikTok's parent company an agent of the Chinese state? With China Inc. it's a bit more complicated

---

2. Exploitation of user data

The risks TikTok poses to U.S. users are much like those posed by many popular apps. Mainly, the app collects data about you. This data, including contact information and website tracking, in addition to any data you post and messages you send through the app, may be used or misused by ByteDance and some other firms which have or receive access to it.

Doug Jacobson, a cybersecurity researcher at Iowa State University, writes that U.S. officials and lawmakers are concerned that the Chinese government could exploit TikTok user data to spy on U.S. residents. Government hackers could use the TikTok data to trick users into revealing more personal information.

But in the case of countering Chinese hackers, a ban on TikTok could prove too little, too late. “By some estimates, the Chinese government has already collected personal information on at least 80% of the U.S. population through various means,” Jacobson writes. “The Chinese government – like anyone else with money – also has access to the large market for personal data.”

---

Read more: Should governments ban TikTok? Can they? A cybersecurity expert explains the risks the app poses and the challenges of blocking it

---

3. The security risks of a ban

A ban on TikTok could also make US users more vulnerable to hacker attacks of all types. Computer security expert Robert Olson of the Rochester Institute of Technology writes that most of the greater than 100 million TikTok users within the US could try to avoid a ban on the app, which could have negative consequences for his or her digital security.

If TikTok is banned from Apple and Google's app stores, users could attempt to access the app elsewhere via sideloading. This practice of bypassing Apple and Google's app stores leaves users vulnerable to malware posing because the TikTok app. TikTok users is also motivated to bypass Apple and Google's security controls to maintain the app installed, a move that may make users' phones more vulnerable.

“I think it's unlikely that a TikTok ban would be technically enforceable,” Olson writes. “This … legislation – aimed at improving cybersecurity – could motivate users to engage in riskier digital behavior.”

---

Read more: TikTok ban could weaken personal cybersecurity

---

4. First Amendment concerns

In its lawsuit against the U.S. government, ByteDance claims that the federal government is violating the corporate's First Amendment rights. Technology law experts Anupam Chander of Georgetown University and Gautam Hans of Cornell University write that ByteDance has standing to sue, and that the implications extend beyond this case.

TikTok is a publisher, a web based publisher of user videos. Forcing ByteDance to divest from TikTok is a type of pre-censorship – the federal government stopping expression before it happens.

“By forcing the sale of TikTok to a company with no ties to the Chinese Communist Party, Congress intends the law to change the nature of the platform,” they write. “This type of government action touches on the core concerns that the First Amendment is designed to protect against: government interference in the free speech of private parties.”

---

Read more: TikTok law threatening ban if app isn't sold raises First Amendment concerns

---

5. What in regards to the others?

Safety and legal issues aside, forcing TikTok to sell to a U.S. company or banning it within the United States is a questionable approach to solving the issues the law is meant to deal with: potential Chinese government influence within the U.S., harm to teenagers, and privacy violations, writes media scholar Sarah Florini of Arizona State University.

The Chinese government – and other U.S. adversaries – have long sought to influence American public opinion using social media apps owned by American firms. TikTok isn’t the one company harming young people, because the Facebook whistleblower case clearly demonstrated. And vast amounts of Americans' personal data are already available to any buyer on the open market and the black market.

“The concerns about TikTok are not unfounded, but they are also not isolated. Every threat posed by TikTok has also emanated from social media in the United States for over a decade,” Florini writes.

---

Read more: Banning TikTok won't solve outside influence, teen vulnerability, and social media's privacy issues

---

Nigeria, Africa's largest democracy, has been under enormous pressure recently.

Attacked by rising inflation, Food insecurity and that rising fuel costs and energy that Nigerians needed to endure reduced purchasing power, hunger And Youth unrest.

These aspects have led to unrest in various parts of society, including requirements for higher wages for civil servants.

At The Conversation Africa, we’ve collaborated with academic experts to achieve insights into the problems troubling Nigeria and Nigerians. Here are eight key articles we’ve published on developments in Nigeria.

Fuel subsidies abolished

In considered one of his first acts as Nigerian president, Bola Tinubu announced the whole abolition of fuel subsidies. This mustn’t have been a surprise, as all of the leading candidates within the presidential election had promised to finish this subsidy, which is seen as a serious drain on the country's resources. But as Stephen Onyeiwu explains, the devil could also be within the mouth.

---

---

Employees demand more

With fuel subsidies removed and inflation high, Nigeria's trade union naturally demanded higher wages. This led to tensions and strikes. The Nigerian government eventually increased the national minimum wage to 70,000 naira (US$42.14) per 30 days. Stephen Onyeiwu argues that this will not be an answer for Nigerian employees.

---

---

Inflation contradicts global logic

The Nigerian government continues to try to unravel the issue of rising inflation and its impact on the purchasing power of residents using various approaches. Interestingly, some strategies that worked in other parts of the world appear to have failed in Nigeria. Stephen Onyeiwu explains that inflation in Nigeria is the results of several aspects.

---

---

Government declares state of emergency

As food prices continued to rise – and are estimated 25 million People suffered from hunger – President Bola Tinubu explained a state of emergency on account of food insecurity. Stephen Onyeiwu expressed doubts in regards to the effectiveness of this approach, arguing that food inflation in Nigeria requires a daring and well-thought-out strategy to rework agriculture and rural life.

---

---

Hunger affects children

With rising fuel prices, food inflation and food shortages, Nigerian children are affected by severe food poverty. According to Unicef, the United Nations Children's Fund, 11 million Nigerian children are affected. Blessing Akombi-Inyang warns that affected children are vulnerable to stunted growth and development, becoming more vulnerable to disease and experiencing higher mortality rates.

---

---

Distraction of attention

Given the economic challenges, the Nigerian government had time to alter the country's national anthem. The government decided to interchange an anthem adopted in 1978 with an old one which was originally officially introduced in 1960. The bill was rushed through the National Assembly inside days. Samuel Oyewole believes this was nothing greater than an try and divert attention from the actual problems.

---

---

Corruption is the actual wrongdoer

Nigeria often is the largest democracy in Africa, but that is just on account of population size. When it involves the true values ​​of democracy, including good governance, Nigeria appears to be lagging behind. Fidelis Allen attributes this to corruption and an absence of social policies.

---

---

Nigeria’s young population offers potential

The population of Nigeria was estimated at approx. 206 million in 2020. The country is by far probably the most populous in Africa. And it has considered one of the biggest Youth population on the planet. With a mean age of 18.1 years 70% of Nigerians are under 30 and 42% are under 15. Akanni Ibukun Akinyemi and Jacob Wale Mobolaji write that the scale and youthfulness of the population – if well managed – offers great potential to expand Nigeria's role as a regional economic center of Africa. However, a big population of young individuals with limited opportunities represents additional social pressures.

---

---

The Economic Community of West African States (Ecowas) has been within the news these days – mostly for the flawed reasons.

The bloc is facing its biggest crisis since its founding in 1975. Three of the 15 countries – Niger, Burkina Faso and Mali – have split from the alliance of Sahel states and formed another alliance.

While the Ecowas hold a gathering On 7 July, Niger, Burkina Faso and Mali met with the heads of state and government of their members in Abuja. Parallel meetings in Niamey, the capital of Niger.

The three countries have praised to not return to the fold of Ecowas.

Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso have some things in common: they’re former French colonies and are currently ruled by military juntas.

At The Conversation Africa, we have now been working with academic experts to realize insights into the impact of the breakaway group and the longer term of Ecowas. Here are five key articles we have now published on developments in West Africa.

Niger because the last straw

On July 26, 2023, the Presidential Guard in Niger arrested President Mohamed Bazoum and the commander of the Presidential Guard, General Abdourahmane Tchiani, declared himself its leader.

In response, Ecowas imposed sanctions on Niger. It also threatened military motion against the junta. Olumba Ezenwa and Olayinka Ajala explain how the specter of military motion prompted Burkina Faso and Mali – each under military rule and Ecowas sanctions – to form an alliance and mutual defense pact with Niger.

---

---

A not so common currency

Before the political crisis at the guts of Ecowas, members of the regional bloc had discussed the creation of a standard currency.

But this plan suffered a setback when the pinnacle of the Nigerian military junta, General Abdourahmane Tchiani, spoke on February 11, 2024 of the possible creation of a standard currency for the breakaway countries. Thierno Thioune analyses the possible impact and feasibility of this step.

---

---

Impact on trade

The reduction of Ecowas’s membership from 15 to 12 has significant implications for the free movement of products and services throughout the region.

A foretaste of what this might mean for the region was the closure of borders as a part of the sanctions against the military coup in Niger.

Olivier Walther explains the devastating consequences of the border closures between the Sahel states and the coastal countries of West Africa for the regional economy.

---

---

Migration barriers

The decision to go away the regional bloc also raises questions on what impact it might have on the flexibility of residents of Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger to maneuver freely inside the region. The agreement inside Ecowas provides for residents to give you the option to maneuver between countries within the region with no visa and to have future residency rights and the proper to establish a business.

Franzisca Zanker, Amanda Bisong and Leonie Jegen argue that the three countries have quite a bit to lose if their withdrawal from ECOWAS limits their mobility.

---

---

There might still be an answer

To find an answer, Ecowas has appointed Senegal's President Bassirou Faye to act as a special mediator with the breakaway states. This was certainly one of the choices taken on the recent Ecowas summit of heads of state and government.

Ahead of the summit, Olayinka Ajala identified six steps that the Ecowas leadership could take to heal the rift and restore confidence within the regional bloc.

---

---

The US Supreme Court has ruled that a president, including former President Donald Trump“shall not be prosecuted for the exercise of his core constitutional powers and shall be entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts.”

The Decision is “super nuanced”, as one legal scholar told The Conversation shortly after the choice was announced on July 1, 2024.

While a president enjoys total immunity within the exercise of his “central constitutional powers,” a sitting or former president also has “presumptive immunity” for all official acts. This immunity, wrote Chief Justice John Roberts in the bulk opinion, “extends to the outer scope of the President's official responsibilities and includes acts so long as they are not obviously or palpably outside his authority.”

“There is no immunity for unofficial acts,” the court ruled.

The results of the vote was 6-3, because the court’s three liberal justices – Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson – Majority opinion within the event of a dissenting opinion.

“Today's decision to grant criminal immunity to former presidents transforms the institution of the presidency. It mocks the fundamental principle of our Constitution and our system of government that no one is above the law,” Sotomayor wrote in her dissenting opinion.

The federal charges against Trump for his actions to overturn the 2020 presidential election will now be sent back to lower courts to come to a decision which of the federal charges against Trump could be pursued. But one end result is obvious – this decision could have significant implications for presidential power and the separation of powers in government.

Until all of the nuances of the choice are analyzed by constitutional lawyers, listed below are 4 stories to assist readers higher understand the arguments upfront of the choice and what was at stake on this case.

1. Laying the foundations

Trump claimed he was immune from federal prosecution for his efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election because he was already president on the time.

“Trump’s argument focused on the claim … that a president cannot be legally prosecuted for his official conduct or actions taken in the exercise of his office,” wrote Claire B. Wofforda political scientist on the College of Charleston.

Since 1982, in a case dating back to Richard Nixon's presidency, presidents have been immune from civil suits due to their official actions, Wofford explained, and Trump sought to expand that immunity protection. But that was a tall order, Wofford wrote:

“Protecting the President from the inconveniences of civil litigation is one thing. Allowing the President, who is responsible under Article 2 of the Constitution for faithfully executing the laws, to break those laws with impunity is quite another.”

In fact, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan wrote in December 2023 that Trump didn’t have the “divine right of kings” to flee criminal responsibility. And a federal appeals court agreed with that call in February 2024. Trump appealed that ruling to the Supreme Court.

---

Read more: Trump was not a king and could be prosecuted for crimes committed during his presidency: Appeals court sets limits on immunity

---

2. An inconsistent claim

Trump's claim was an uphill battle. Stephanie Lindquista constitutional lawyer at Arizona State University, stated:

“In several lawsuits he filed throughout the 2020 election difficult the outcomes, Trump himself said he was acting 'in his personal capability as a candidate' and never in his official capability as president.

“Now, however, Trump is claiming that his comments on 'matters of public interest' were within the scope of his presidential duties, whether or not he was a candidate on January 6.”

This inconsistency, in addition to the final principle of the Constitution that nobody is above the law, made it difficult to argue Trump's position.

---

Read more: Trump claims the Constitution grants him immunity – here's why judges and Supreme Court may disagree

---

3. A choice that takes a protracted time to return

Wofforda constitutional law scholar on the College of Charleston, noted before the Supreme Court's decision in July that there was public concern in regards to the time it took the court to make a choice. But she said that this delay was within the service of democracy reasonably than a partisan maneuver:

“When the Supreme Court makes a decision, it is inevitably answering a very difficult legal question. If the answers were clear, the case would never have been the subject of litigation before the Supreme Court.”

And the judges’ role in deciding the case is crucial for the nation, she wrote:

“Given the potentially unconstitutional actions Trump has threatened to take if re-elected, the country will need a strong and respected Supreme Court in the near future. Those angry at the court should actually be very happy that it is business as usual. If it were not, their fears that Trump will get away with anything may actually come true.”

---

Read more: Supreme Court's slow decision on Trump's immunity is the alternative of politics

---

4. What this implies for the longer term

Earlier this spring Wofford noted some worrying signs throughout the oral hearing before the Supreme Court on April 25, 2024:

“Several justices from all ideological camps expressed deep concern about the practical implications of granting or denying a president some degree of immunity.”

For example, Wofford noted:

“Justice Samuel Alito seemed genuinely concerned that the president might face political persecution if he were not protected by immunity. … On the other hand, … (Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson) said a president could take office 'knowing that he could not expect punishment for committing crimes.'”

Wofford expected the justices would seek to grant either full immunity or no immunity in any respect – and subsequently allow Trump's federal case for attempting to overturn the 2020 presidential election to proceed, since lots of his actions were private and unofficial. Although that too posed a risk, Wofford wrote:

“I wish there were some other means by which the court could resolve this issue, and that so many people did not feel that the fate of our government and the stability of our system were at stake. … If the court does not make it clear and unambiguous that the president is not above the law, then I think we have a serious problem.”

---

Read more: Trump's Supreme Court immunity arguments highlight dangers — as prosecutors stress greater risk of waiving legal accountability

---

This story is a summary of articles from The Conversation archives.

On June 2, 2024, Mexicans will go to the polls to elect a president after an electoral campaign marked by violence And divisive political rhetoric.

Survey suggest that the candidate of the ruling party Claudia Sheinbaum will win, defeating her rival Xóchitl Gálvez, who leads a left-right coalition.

The level of voter turnout should be unpredictable, but unless there are major surprises, Mexico may have its first female president once all votes are counted.

Scholars writing for The Conversation US have discussed, amongst other things, what this gender milestone will mean for Mexico. Here are three stories that explore the importance of the 2024 Mexican elections.

1. Towards gender equality?

There has been plenty of discuss Mexico soon electing a lady president, but does this really reflect gender equality within the country's politics? Xavier Medina Vidal And Christopher Chambers-JuScholars of Mexican politics and gender issues on the University of Texas at Arlington are investigating this query.

They indicate that although women already make up half of the Mexican Congress and hold top positions in politics and the judiciary, this only tells a part of the story.

“Electing women to high office does not necessarily result in a meaningful shift in power. Experts on women in politics call this 'descriptive representation' – when political leaders resemble a group of voters but fail to take measures that protect them,” they write. A serious concern is the extent of violence and harassment against women in Mexico, each by women in the general public eye and by unusual residents. The femicide rate in Mexico stays shockingly high: 10 women and girls are killed daily.

“Although women are gaining political power in Mexico, the question now is whether they will use it to fight for the women they represent,” conclude Medina Vidal and Chambers-Ju.

---

Read more: Mexico will soon elect its first female president – ​​but this milestone masks uneven progress on women's rights

---

2. A deadly election cycle

The 2024 elections can even be a milestone for Mexico in one other respect: the violence throughout the election campaign. Amalendu MisraProfessor of international politics at Lancaster University, points out that the election season – during which voters also choose hundreds of positions on the local, state and congressional levels – is on target to be the deadliest ever.

“Violence against Mexican politicians is commonplace,” he writes. “But the country's powerful organized gangs are increasing their political violence during election campaigns to gain the approval of candidates and secure business opportunities.”

Making matters worse, the country's gangs have been fragmenting in recent times, with cartels splitting into different branches. “Put simply, the ongoing violence against politicians and political candidates in Mexico reflects the struggle of various organized crime gangs for territorial consolidation and lucrative business opportunities,” Misra notes.

At least 36 candidates were killed throughout the current electoral cycle.

---

Read more: Mexico's criminal gangs fuel political violence ahead of elections

---

3. The state of democracy

Of course, Mexico just isn’t the one country in Latin America where gang violence disrupts the political process.

What impact does this have on people’s attitudes towards democracy within the region? Lukas Plutowski, Elizabeth J. Zechmeister And Noam Lupu on the LAPOP Lab at Vanderbilt University have some answers.

Their latest AmericasBarometer, which surveys public attitudes across the Western Hemisphere every two years, finds that widespread pessimism about poverty and violence influences people's attitudes toward democracy in Latin America.

“Our results show that disappointment with the democratic status quo in the region is strikingly high: only 40 percent believe that democracy works,” they note.

But despite this gloomy assessment, support for the concept of ​​democracy stays high. Across the region, 58 percent of individuals consider democracy is the most effective form of presidency. In Mexico, this figure is even higher, at 62 percent.

“For now at least, a sustained belief in democracy could facilitate the efforts of political leaders inside and outside the region to advocate for and strengthen democratic governance,” conclude Plutowski, Zechmeister and Lupu.

---

Read more: Faced with serious challenges, democracy in Latin America and the Caribbean is under pressure – but support continues

---