TikTok’s future in the U.S. is now in greater jeopardy after the popular social video app on Friday lost a major court battle as it tries to prevent its banishment.

In May, TikTok sued the government, asking the U.S. Court of Appeals to declare unconstitutional a law that would require its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, to divest TikTok’s U.S. operations or face a ban in the country.

Legislators backing the law said a ban or sale was necessary to address national security concerns posed by the app’s ties to China.

The law, signed by President Biden, is set to go into effect Jan. 19.

TikTok had said in its lawsuit that the law violated its 1st Amendment rights to free speech. TikTok contended that the law “offers no support for the idea” that TikTok’s Chinese ownership poses national security risks.

More than 170 million Americans use the video app, where people share dance routines, cooking tips, funny videos and news stories.

“On the merits, we reject each of the petitioners’ constitutional claims,” the judges said in their decision issued Friday.

Legal experts said they anticipate TikTok will appeal its case to the Supreme Court. It is also possible that Biden could offer ByteDance an extension to divest, but some experts said they believe that is unlikely.

“The Supreme Court has an established historical record of protecting Americans’ right to free speech, and we expect they will do just that on this important constitutional issue,” said TikTok spokesman Michael Hughes in a statement on Friday. “Unfortunately, the TikTok ban was conceived and pushed through based upon inaccurate, flawed and hypothetical information, resulting in outright censorship of the American people.”

Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond, said TikTok could ask the court to put a hold on the ruling until the Supreme Court hears its case.

“They still have another shot with the Supreme Court,” Tobias said. “It’s an important issue. It’s a difficult one, and it affects a lot of Americans, foreign policy and national security. If it’s a matter of [the Supreme Court’s]interest in it, I expect that interest would be high.”

President-elect Donald Trump had campaigned on supporting TikTok, despite having pushed for a ban during his first term.

“We’re not doing anything with TikTok,” he said on a video posted on social media earlier this year.

The Trump transition team did not immediately return a request for comment. His statements in support of TikTok have given creators some hope, though it’s not clear what action his administration will take.

The ban would go into effect the day before Trump takes office.

A ban on TikTok could hurt the livelihoods of many Southern California video creators and influencers who post content on the platform. Many of those creators over the years have diversified where they post their content to prepare for a potential ban.

Sabrina Mercado, 21, is a full-time content creator from Downey. She created her TikTok in 2019 and today has 459,000 followers on the platform.

About a year ago, Mercado briefly considered creating a press-on nail business and selling on TikTok Shop, the company’s e-commerce platform, but hesitated.

“If TikTok were to be banned, what would happen to business?” she said. “It just makes things riskier.”

Mercado now posts on Instagram, TikTok YouTube and Snapchat, with Instagram being her main focus.

Joey Soboleski II, 26, a full-time content creator from Glendale, has grown his following to more than 403,000 people who watch his comedy and lifestyle content since joining TikTok in 2019.

Still, he’s not concerned about a ban.

“I built a platform on Instagram that’s bigger than TikTok and I think the viewership will go over to Instagram honestly or YouTube or both. And then the money will go over,” he said.

Disney+ subscribers will now see an ESPN tile on the streaming service’s homepage, part of Walt Disney Co.’s continued efforts to increase subscribers and reduce churn.

Starting Wednesday, bundle subscribers to Disney+, Hulu and ESPN+ will be able to access ESPN content from the Disney+ app.

Those who subscribe only to Disney+ will also be able to watch some Hulu and ESPN+ content through the app, including certain live NBA games, the first day of the Australian Open and some “30 for 30” sports documentaries, as well as series and movies such as FX’s Emmy-winning “Shogun,” crime procedural “Will Trent” and the film “Dawn of the Planet of the Apes.”

The idea, Disney officials said, is to whet people’s appetites and encourage upgrades to the full bundle.

“There are opportunities to use the sampling experiences [as] lead-in to a more fulsome experience,” said Alisa Bowen, president of Disney+.

The addition of ESPN content to Disney+ is similar to the roll-out of the Hulu tile earlier this year. By integrating all three of its streaming services into one platform, Disney is betting that a more seamless experience will keep subscribers engaged and increase retention, Bowen said.

“This strategy is really about making it easier for them to consume everything that they’re paying for, giving them less friction in terms of navigating between the different apps and better ability for us to personalize the content from all those different services,” she said.

Disney’s streaming business is key for its growth plans. The company has projected that its entertainment streaming business, which includes just Disney+ and Hulu, will have a 10% operating margin by 2025.

On the sports front, the company is planning to launch its ESPN flagship product in August.

A South Carolina mom is suing Mattel after links to an adult website appeared on the packaging of its line of “Wicked” dolls.

Holly Ricketson, the plaintiff, filed a class action suit, claiming that her daughter, a minor, used her iPhone to visit a porn site found listed on the box of the “Wicked” doll she bought for her last month. The suit was filed Tuesday in federal court in the Central District of California.

The site “had nothing to do with the Wicked Doll. Rather, Wicked.com pasted scenes of pornographic advertisements across her phone screen,” states the complaint.

“These scenes were hardcore, full on nude pornographic images depicting actual intercourse. Plaintiff’s minor daughter immediately showed her mother the photographs and both were horrified by what they saw. If plaintiff had been aware of such an inappropriate defect in the product, she would not have purchased it.”

The toy manufacturer apologized for the misprint after the error came to light when social media users discovered that the link to the film — which should have been wickedmovie.com — was mislabeled, sending consumers to Wicked Pictures, an independent adult film company.

The merchandise was launched to coincide with Universal’s box office hit. The packaging included those holding Elphaba and Glinda dolls. In the film, Elphaba is played by Cynthia Erivo and Glinda is played by Ariana Grande.

The well-reviewed film, which is rated PG, has grossed more than $275 million in the U.S. and Canada so far.

“Mattel was made aware of a misprint on the packaging of the Mattel Wicked collection dolls, primarily sold in the U.S., which intended to direct consumers to the official WickedMovie.com landing page,” the toy company said in a statement. “We deeply regret this unfortunate error and are taking immediate action to remedy this.”

The toy maker advised parents that the label was incorrect and directed consumers who had already purchased the product to discard its packaging and contact Mattel Customer Service.

Mattel moved to pull the dolls from online retailers and stores including Target, one of Universal’s retail partners on the movie.

However, Ricketson claims that the company did not “offer a refund for consumers who had already purchased the dolls.” Further, she claims her daughter “experienced emotional distress” as a result of the mislabeled packaging.

Mattel declined to comment on the lawsuit. However, the firm earlier this week issued a statement to Deadline and other outlets:

“The Wicked Dolls have returned for sale with correct packaging at retailers online and in stores to meet the strong consumer demand for the products,” Mattel said. “The previous misprint on the packaging in no way impacts the value or play experience provided by the product itself in the limited number of units sold before the correction.”