When the Supreme Court upheld a law that banned TikTok from the US, it seemed well aware that its ruling could resonate far beyond one app. The justices delivered an unsigned opinion with a quote from Justice Felix Frankfurter from 1944: “in considering the application of established legal rules to the ‘totally new problems’ raised by the airplane and radio, we should take care not to ‘embarrass the future.’”
Technology
The Supreme Court’s TikTok ruling is an ominous turn for online speech
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/25826019/STK051_TIKTOKBAN_STK463_SCOTUS__CVirginia_C.jpg?ssl=1 "The Supreme Court’s TikTok ruling is an ominous turn for online speech")
Last Friday, the court tried to accomplish this with a narrow ruling: a decision that upheld the government’s ability to ban one service on a tight timeline, while stressing a limited scope concerning “new technologies with transformative capabilities.” Yet, amid a confounding political circus over TikTok, some legal experts believe the Supreme Court’s ruling could have a broad ripple effect on speech and tech law — they’re just not agreed on what it would be.
“Even though it’s narrowly written, it also seems clear that they want to make a mark on these kinds of questions,” says Sarah Kreps, director of the Tech Policy Institute at Cornell University’s public policy school. University of Chicago law professor Genevieve Lakier put it more bluntly on Bluesky: “The Court tried but failed to make no new law here.”
Lakier’s main concern, echoed by several amicus briefs in the case, is that the Supreme Court is enabling a form of backdoor speech regulation. In oral arguments, the US government insisted that the ban wasn’t a First Amendment issue because it only targeted corporate structure — in this case, TikTok’s foreign ownership. But TikTok argued that lawmakers disliked TikTok and its users’ speech and merely found a pretext for punishing it. At the very least, Lakier and others worry the Supreme Court ruling could let something like that happen to other communications platforms.
“The Court tried but failed to make no new law here.”
“The very worst part of the opinion (I think right now) is that it gives [governments] space to whitewash bad content-based motivations by tacking on plausible-sounding content-neutral ones,” Lakier wrote. The court determined that selling a business isn’t an expressive act, but she argues this conflicts with one of its most widely known rulings: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which found that an act that doesn’t explicitly involve speech (donating to political campaigns) could still count as a form of speech.
Then there’s the ruling’s decision that national security could justify potential speech suppression. The court “has weakened the First Amendment and markedly expanded the government’s power to restrict speech in the name of national security,” said Jameel Jaffer, Knight First Amendment Institute executive director. American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) National Security Project deputy director Patrick Toomey echoed these concerns: “the Supreme Court is giving the executive branch unprecedented power to silence speech it doesn’t like, increasing the danger that sweeping invocations of ‘national security’ will trump our constitutional rights.”
“American-owned platforms are still covered pretty aggressively under Section 230.”
Kreps thinks the ruling is unlikely to bring a wave of censorship for US-based companies, though. “I think that part of the opinion was indeed narrow, and was very careful that this foreign ownership puts it into a very different category,” she says. “American-owned platforms are still covered pretty aggressively under Section 230.”
But if nothing else, the decision will “make it more difficult for the United States to challenge the increasing number of censorial speech regulations targeting U.S.-based platforms in other countries,” writes Jacob Mchangama, executive director of The Future of Free Speech, a nonpartisan think tank at Vanderbilt University.
While some fear a future of speech regulations wrapped in national security rhetoric, others make the opposite argument: that it will stop businesses from dodging regulation by hiding behind the First Amendment.
“Corporations may not hide behind flimsy First Amendment arguments in order to avoid regulation carte blanche”
The Open Markets Institute, which advocates for stronger antitrust enforcement, took a positive view of the ruling — despite being unconvinced of the law’s merits. “The Supreme Court reaffirms an important precedent that Congress maintains fundamental legislative authority to regulate corporations,” senior legal analyst Daniel Hanley says in a statement. “In other words, corporations may not hide behind flimsy First Amendment arguments in order to avoid regulation carte blanche.”
University of Colorado Law School professor Blake Reid says the ruling is unlikely to affect some baseline legal questions, like how the court decides whether future tech laws raise First Amendment concerns. He believes TikTok made a weak argument for its own speech interests, particularly because the law’s penalties apply to app stores and hosting services, not TikTok itself. “TikTok had a harder job than it seemed to think it did in establishing how its speech was getting implicated,” says Reid. “When your speech is contingent on the speech of platforms who are not going to show up and fight the government on your behalf, that’s a tough place to be in.”
Other platforms have made similar arguments convincingly, though — Reid pointed, for instance, to the 2024 NetChoice rulings that recognized content moderation as expressive speech.
The TikTok ruling could change how courts across the country address one crucial issue: the level of scrutiny applied to lawsuits that allege First Amendment violations, a decision that dramatically impacts their likelihood of success. The government put forward two separate rationales for its ban: concerns that China was collecting US data and that it could manipulate TikTok’s algorithm for propaganda purposes. The court seemed skeptical of the latter argument, and it decided data collection alone justified upholding the law. “The court was pretty open here to saying, we’re going to look past the justification we might have some more concerns about and look for the one that seems legitimate,” Reid says. Lower courts, he predicts, could decide “maybe we can be a little bit more solicitous” of the claims legislators make about why they’re passing internet regulation.
It’s a balancing act the Supreme Court will have to make again later this year. Last week, the court held arguments in Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton, which pits First Amendment rights against state legislatures’ concerns about children’s access to pornography. That decision will hinge on what level of scrutiny the court applies — and its ruling could overturn a two-decade-old precedent and age-gate parts of the internet.
Even so, Reid sees the TikTok ruling’s role as “a pretty small change on the margins” in the grand scheme of things. In the end, Reid says, “the biggest thing about this case is just the impact on TikTok itself.”
Continue Reading
OpenAI announced yet another reorganization Friday, consolidating certain areas and making company president Greg Brockman the official lead of all things product.
In a memo viewed by The Verge, Brockman wrote that since OpenAI’s product strategy for this year is to go all-in on AI agents, the company is combining its products to “invest in a single agentic platform and to merge ChatGPT and Codex into one unified agentic experience for all.”
To do this, the company is making a suite of org chart changes, although it’s still operating under some of the same ones from last month. That’s when AGI boss Fidji Simo went on medical leave and OpenAI announced that Brockman would be in charge of product strategy and CSO Jason Kwon, CFO Sarah Friar, and CRO Denise Dresser would take control of business operations.
It’s all part of OpenAI’s recent strategic shift to focus on key revenue drivers like coding and enterprise and stop pouring resources into “side quests” ahead of its potential IPO later this year and amid investor pressure to turn a profit.
In Simo’s continued absence, Brockman’s role leading product strategy is now official, as well as the company’s “scaling” arm. Under Brockman will be four different pillars. The first is core product and platform, led by Thibault Sottiaux, who has been OpenAI’s engineering lead for Codex, and the second is critical enterprise industries, led by ChatGPT head Nick Turley. Third is the consumer pillar, such as health, commerce, and personal finance, which will be led by Ashley Alexander, who has been its healthcare products VP. The fourth pillar — core infrastructure, ads, data science, and growth — will be led by Vijaye Raji, who has been OpenAI’s CTO of applications.
Brockman wrote in the memo that OpenAI’s goal is now to “bring agents to ChatGPT scale, in order to give individuals and organizations significantly more value and utility from our products.”
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
You’re going about your day when your phone buzzes. A text hits your phone. It looks official. It sounds urgent. And suddenly, you are being told you owe money for a traffic violation. That is exactly what Todd from Texas experienced. He emailed us and said:
“I received this text message today. It was so baffling because I haven’t lived in California for nearly a decade. I didn’t click on anything or respond. How can I tell if this is for real or if this is a scam?”
If you’ve gotten a message like this, you are not alone. This type of scam is spreading fast, and it is designed to pressure you into acting before you think. Let’s break down what is really going on.
Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
- Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox.
- For simple, real-world ways to spot scams early and stay protected, visit CyberGuy.com – trusted by millions who watch CyberGuy on TV daily.
- Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide free when you join.
FAKE AGENT PHONE SCAMS ARE SPREADING FAST ACROSS THE US
This message may look official, but several red flags show it is likely a scam designed to pressure you into paying quickly. (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)
What the traffic ticket scam text looks like
At first, the message seems convincing. It claims to be a “final reminder” from the California DMV, and it warns of penalties like license suspension and added fees. It even includes a link that appears somewhat official. However, once you slow down and take a closer look, the red flags quickly start to pile up.
The biggest red flags in this message
Here are the key warning signs to watch for in messages like this.
9 WAYS SCAMMERS CAN USE YOUR PHONE NUMBER TO TRY TO TRICK YOU
1) The phone number makes no sense
The message comes from a number with a +63 country code. That is the Philippines, not California. Government agencies in the U.S. do not send official legal notices from international numbers. That alone is a major warning sign.
2) No name, just “Dear Driver”
Legitimate notices from a DMV or court almost always include your full name or at least some identifying information. “Dear Driver” is vague on purpose. It allows scammers to send the same message to thousands of people.
3) The link isn’t a real DMV website
The message includes this link:
ca.mnvtl.life/dmv
That isn’t a government domain. Official DMV websites in California use “.ca.gov” or similar trusted domains. Scammers often create lookalike links to trick you into clicking.
4) Urgency and threats
The message pushes you to act quickly with a deadline. It lists consequences like license suspension and extra charges. Scammers rely on fear. When you feel rushed, you are more likely to click without thinking.
FBI WARNS OF DANGEROUS NEW ‘SMISHING’ SCAM TARGETING YOUR PHONE
5) Asking you to reply to proceed
The text says to reply with “Y” to get instructions. That is another trap. Responding confirms your number is active, which can lead to more scam messages.
6) Generic language and odd phrasing
Parts of the message feel slightly off. The tone is formal but not quite right. That subtle awkwardness is common in scam messages sent to large groups of people.
7) Overloaded threats designed to scare you
The message piles on consequences like license suspension, added fees, court action and even credit damage. In this case, it even mentions a license suspension and a $160 late payment charge. That combination is meant to overwhelm you and push you to act fast. Real agencies usually provide clear, specific notices, not a long list of escalating threats in a single text.
INSIDE A SCAMMER’S DAY AND HOW THEY TARGET YOU
Scam texts like this often arrive out of nowhere and try to create urgency before you have time to question them. (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)
What this means for you
Even if you have never driven in California, you could still receive this message. Scammers cast a wide net and hope someone takes the bait. If you click the link, you could be taken to a fake payment page. That page may ask for your credit card details, personal information or login credentials. In some cases, it can also install malware on your device or redirect you to credential-stealing pages. This isn’t about a ticket. It is about getting your data. State DMVs typically do not send final legal notices or payment demands by text message.
Why these scams keep working
These messages work because they tap into something most people fear. Legal trouble, fines and losing driving privileges. They also look just real enough to pass a quick glance. That is all scammers need. As more services move online, these scams will continue to evolve.
Unlike typical DMV scams, this message impersonates a court and escalates the threats to make the situation feel more serious (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)
Ways to stay safe from traffic ticket text scams
Start with a simple rule. Never trust a payment request that shows up out of nowhere. Here are practical steps you can take:
1) Do not click the link
If you are unsure, do not tap anything in the message. That includes links and reply options.
2) Use strong antivirus software
If you accidentally click a link, strong antivirus software can help detect malware and protect your data. Get my picks for the best 2026 antivirus protection winners for your Windows, Mac, Android & iOS devices at Cyberguy.com
3) Verify directly with the DMV
Go to your state’s official DMV website by typing it yourself into your browser. Do not use the link in the text.
4) Check the sender carefully
Look at the phone number. International numbers or random strings are a clear warning sign.
5) Ignore generic greetings
Real notices will usually include your name or case details. Vague language is a red flag.
6) Consider a data removal service
Scammers often get your number from data broker sites. Removing your personal info from those databases with a data removal service can reduce these messages. Check out my top picks for data removal services and get a free scan to find out if your personal information is already out on the web by visiting Cyberguy.com
7) Block and report the number
On your phone, block the sender and report it as spam. This helps reduce future attempts.
8) Turn on spam filtering
Enable spam filtering on your phone or through your carrier to catch more of these messages before they reach you.
Kurt’s key takeaways
Todd did the right thing. He paused, questioned the message and did not click. That one decision likely saved him from handing over personal information. When it comes to messages like this, skepticism is your best defense. If something feels off, trust that instinct.
Should phone carriers and tech companies be doing more to block scams like this before you ever see them? Let us know by writing to us at Cyberguy.com
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
- Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox.
- For simple, real-world ways to spot scams early and stay protected, visit CyberGuy.com – trusted by millions who watch CyberGuy on TV daily.
- Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide free when you join.
Copyright 2026 CyberGuy.com. All rights reserved.
Honda revealed prototypes of two new hybrid models, an Accord sedan and the Acura RDX SUV, during its annual business briefing this week, built on a platform that it says will begin launching next year. The RDX was announced earlier this year as Honda’s first SUV to feature the next-gen version of its two-motor hybrid system.
In March, Honda announced it would take a writedown of up to 2.5 trillion yen ($15.7 billion) on its EV investments. Now Honda says its EV-related losses will be “resolved” by 2029, and that it will reevaluate its EV plans in 2030.
-
Science16 seconds agoArchaeologists Find Egyptian Mummy Buried With the ‘Iliad’
-
Culture18 minutes agoSpeculative Fiction Books Full of Real Horrors
-
Lifestyle24 minutes agoEating Healthy? No, They’re Eating Biblically.
-
Education30 minutes ago‘No Essay’ College Scholarships May Have Unseen Strings Attached
-
Technology36 minutes agoOpenAI keeps shuffling its executives in bid to win AI agent battle
-
World42 minutes agoHamas used sexual violence ‘deliberately and systematically’ on Oct 7, commission report finds
-
Politics48 minutes agoTrump leaves China with breakthroughs — and unfinished business on Xi’s biggest fights
-
Health54 minutes agoCancer-related brain fog may improve with 2 simple treatments, scientists say