Trump files statement of claim in the Supreme Court’s high-profile TikTok case

Welcome back, Deadline: Legal Newsletter readers. President-elect Donald Trump doesn’t take office until later this month, but he filed a brief in the highly anticipated TikTok ban case ahead of next week’s Supreme Court hearing. And the new year brought Chief Justice John Roberts’ annual report, while Trump received a new sentencing date in New York and we were reminded that his hampered criminal caseload is not his only legal risk.

Trump is not involved in the TikTok case The hearing is scheduled for next Friday, January 10th. The parties in TikTok vs. Garland pit the popular social media app and its users against the federal government. Trump’s order does not address whether the First Amendment can block a law that would ban the app’s operation in the United States if the Chinese parent company does not sell it. Rather, he wants the justices to suspend the statutory deadline of January 19th for the sale so that he can seek what he called in his order what he called a “political solution” to the dispute after his inauguration on January 20th.

In particular, the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal criticized Trump’s SCOTUS brief filed by John Sauer, Trump’s pick for attorney general. “The order is extraordinary in several ways, none of them good,” the conservative board wrote. It was noted that the judges had previously rejected a request from TikTok to suspend the law pending the Supreme Court’s final decision. “Mr. Granting Trump’s request for a stay now would set a bad precedent that invites future future presidents to interfere in pending litigation,” the panel wrote. It added that the attorney general “is not intended to be Mr. Trump’s personal attorney and that Mr. Sauer’s assignment will not help his credibility with the justices if he is confirmed by the Senate.”

The January 10 TikTok hearing in Washington should give us a better sense of where the court is heading on appeals as we enter the new year. Stay tuned for a special edition of the newsletter next week to find out how the hearing went and what it means for the fate of the app.

January 10th is also Trump’s sentencing date in New York. That’s according to a ruling on Friday by Judge Juan Merchan, who rejected the president-elect’s latest request that stood in the way of a conviction. In particular, Merchan said he was not inclined to sentence Trump to prison on the 34 counts of falsifying business records for which a Manhattan jury found the defendant guilty last year. However, Trump’s lawyers could still try to delay sentencing before his inauguration on January 20th.

Trump’s civil cases also made headlines as a federal appeals court rejected his request for a new trial in the case in which a jury awarded writer E. Jean Carroll $5 million after she blamed Trump for sexual abuse and defamation. Note that this is a different case than the one in which a jury awarded her $83 million in defamation damages. A spokesman for Trump said he would continue to appeal.

Judicial independence was the subject of Roberts’ 2024 report, which appeared on New Year’s Eve. The chief condemned “four areas of illegitimate activity” that he said threaten that independence: violence, intimidation, disinformation and threats to defy court orders. On the whole, it’s difficult to disagree, although Roberts was vague in places about who or what he meant. In any case, we’ll see if he speaks out if Vice President-elect JD Vance supports rejecting any decisions, which Vance says would be appropriate if the courts rule against Trump.

In a way, Justice Clarence Thomas continues the theme of judicial independence is not referred to the DOJ by a federal judicial panel for ethics violations. The Judicial Conference noted in its response to Democratic lawmakers that it lacked authority over the judges, adding that this was largely a moot point because Democrats had already asked the attorney general to appoint a special counsel to investigate the matter to appoint. The conference sent a similar letter in response to former (and possible future) Trump administration official Russell Vought’s request to refer Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the DOJ.

“Smacky and ahistorical” Here’s how Fix the Court’s Gabe Roth reacted to Thomas’ news. “As was the case when the Ethics in Government Act was enacted, we are once again in an era marked by great attention to government misconduct,” he said. “But unlike the post-Watergate era, judges today sit on superyachts, fly around the globe in private jets and laugh in our faces.”

Subscribe to the Deadline: Legal Newsletter for expert analysis on the week’s most important legal topics, including Supreme Court updates and developments in Donald Trump’s legal cases.