On today’s edition of The Editors, Rich and Co. consider what the future may hold for TikTok, which fought before the Supreme Court last week against a law requiring Chinese company ByteDance to either divest from the app or cease operating it in America.

“Donald Trump has been swayed by political arguments against the national security arguments against TikTok,” says Noah. “I don’t believe the Supreme Court is going to leave this in the president’s court, as it were, because this is a congressional edict.”

Will Trump try to protect TikTok once in office? Noah says it wouldn’t be in his best interest: “He really shouldn’t have the ability to contradict this order or to delay it, as I see it, because the arguments for it are far more compelling than the arguments against it, which are essentially that it will inconvenience and frustrate and annoy a lot of young Americans who like this application and sort of sidesteps the arguments against it, which I think its proprietor have all but confirmed.”

Rich questions Charlie about the Supreme Court’s potential ruling on this case, and Charlie doesn’t “think there’s a constitutional problem with this law. And I don’t think the Court will find that there’s a constitutional problem with this law. The argument I see advanced most commonly is that it is an indirect violation of the First Amendment. That is to say that Americans enjoy First Amendment rights, and that by restricting this foreign business, then Americans have less capacity to indulge and use those rights. I don’t buy that. I think that we have always as a nation allowed Congress to pass laws that affect international commerce, and this is international commerce.”

Tune in below to hear Jim and Rich’s takes on this pressing topic.

The Editors podcast is recorded on Tuesdays and Fridays every week and is available wherever you listen to podcasts.