A judge in California this weekend blocked the Trump administration ruling that Chinese social media app WeChat should be removed from the Apple Inc. App Store and the Google LLC Play Store on First Amendment grounds.

Though it’s not well-known in the west, WeChat has more than 1.2 billion users as of the first quarter of 2020 and is the leading social media app in mainland China. The app is also popular among the Chinese diaspora and has been making some inroads in other countries particularly given its payment functions (pictured). In addition, it competes directly with the Facebook Inc.-owned WhatsApp and to some extent Facebook Messenger in some countries.

WeChat, owned by Tencent Holdings Ltd., managed to get caught up in the Trump administration’s obsession with TikTok and national security. Tencent has come into the spotlight in terms of the administration’s interest in alleged Chinese Communist Party spying. Those concerns include Tencent being an investor in Epic Games Ltd., the company behind Fortnite that has also drawn interest from the Trump administration.

Where WeChat’s status becomes interesting in the U.S., aside from allegations of CCP spying, is the grounds on which the judge in California blocked the Trump administration WeChat ban: the First Amendment. That’s not without irony given that China’s wumao, the so-called 50 cent army, heavily censors it. But arguably not banning it on free speech grounds could be seen as an example of how western and U.S. law delivers positive outcomes.

According to Reuters, U.S. Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler in San Francisco, in response to a lawsuit filed against the order, said that the litigants in the lawsuit “have shown serious questions going to the merits of the First Amendment claim, the balance of hardships tips in the plaintiffs’ favor.”

The order states that the Trump administration’s order “burden[s] substantially more speech than is necessary to serve the government’s significant interest in national security, especially given the lack of substitute channels for communication.”

As with TikTok, the administration, through the U.S. Commerce Department, argued that WeChat presents national security grounds issues.

The ruling went further and also blocked the order that that would have barred any transactions with WeChat in the U.S. “that could have dramatically degraded the site’s usability for current U.S. users or potentially made it unusable.”

The Reuters report notes that WeChat has an average of 19 million daily active users in the U.S. and is particularly popular among Chinese students, Americans living in China and some Americans who have personal or business relationships in China.

Although WeChat is different from TikTok in that it’s a chat and social media app whereas TikTok is a short video service, the court ruling could set a precedent. Does the First Amendment apply to Chinese apps offered in the U.S.? The judge seems to think so and if the ruling is found to be legally sound — it will likely go to appeals courts and further up the chain — that complicates the TikTok drama as well.

Photo: Duncan Riley