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
Amazon’s rolling out a free software update for Echo Hub devices that gives the home screen a much-needed update to the interface it launched with in 2024. It had already added Alex Plus AI support, but the new interface has a cleaner, fully customizable layout that fits more smart home info and controls on the screen than the previous version.
The Echo Hub is also getting access to Ring AI’s Video Search feature that lets you use natural language to search through your smart home camera footage, as well as Alexa Plus summaries of detected camera events.
These are the five new features Amazon highlighted for the Echo Hub:
Organize by r …
Read the full story at The Verge.
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
The FBI calls it a “distress scam.” It is also known as a grandparent scam. The scam works by making an older adult believe a grandchild is in serious trouble and needs money right away, often before a court date or legal deadline. Victims reported more than $5 million in losses to this type of fraud in 2025. The FBI’s Internet Crime Complaint Center also noted that reported losses likely show only part of what scammers actually stole.
The Federal Trade Commission found in August 2025 that some of the fastest-growing scams targeting older adults use fear and urgency to override good judgment. A caller may claim your bank account was hacked and say you need to move your money immediately to protect it. However, the money does not move to safety. It goes straight to the scammer.
HOW TO HAND OFF DATA PRIVACY RESPONSIBILITIES FOR OLDER ADULTS TO A TRUSTED LOVED ONE
AI voice-cloning tools have made these scams even more convincing. Scammers can use a birthday video, voicemail or social media clip to mimic a grandchild’s voice. Then they place the call. The voice sounds familiar, the emergency feels real and the request for bail money seems urgent. The FBI counted $352 million in AI-related scam losses among victims 60 and older this past year.
Join CyberGuy Live: Lock Down Your Phone in 30 Minutes (This Saturday, June 13, 10 am ET)
- Your phone holds your email, passwords, photos, banking apps and personal data. In this free, live online class, Kurt the CyberGuy will walk you step by step through simple phone security fixes you can do in real time. You’ll learn how to improve your privacy settings, spot the latest phone scams, use trusted security tools and walk away with a simple checklist to stay protected. Register here: CyberGuyLive.com
Scammers are using stolen personal data, AI voice cloning and urgent phone calls to trick grandparents into sending money. (ljubaphoto/Getty Images)
What makes grandparents worth targeting
The same three pieces of data are required for identity verification at most banks, brokerages, pension recordkeepers, and Medicare: date of birth, last four digits of a Social Security number, and a current mailing address. For most people in their sixties and seventies, all of those accounts are open.
Those three fields have turned up in breach after breach. The Conduent Business Services breach pulled names, SSNs, dates of birth, and home addresses for more than 25 million Americans from systems that process Medicaid records and employer health plans. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton called it the largest data breach in U.S. history in February 2026.
Americans between 65 and 74 held a median net worth of $409,900 in 2022, according to the Federal Reserve’s Survey of Consumer Finances, more than ten times the median for adults under 35. The FBI found average losses of approximately $38,500 per victim among Americans 60 and older in 2025, nearly double the figure for younger filers.
Why elder fraud losses are often underreported
Older adults reported $2.4 billion in fraud losses to the Federal Trade Commission in 2024. However, the FTC’s December 2025 report to Congress estimated that real losses may have reached $81.5 billion that year. Most cases likely went unreported.
That gap makes identity theft harder to stop. A fraudulent wire from a pension account may never alert a bank. A new credit account opened with stolen information may not reach the victim until it appears on a credit report. By then, weeks may have passed since the application was approved.
Account protections worth setting up
Scammers move fast, so it helps to set up account protections before anything goes wrong. These steps can give banks, brokerage firms and family members more ways to spot trouble early.
1) Add a trusted contact to brokerage accounts
Brokerage accounts have a protection option many account holders never activate: a trusted contact designation. Under FINRA Rule 4512, brokerage firms must ask for a trusted contact when you open or update an account. A trusted contact can be a family member, attorney or accountant. The firm can contact that person if it suspects financial exploitation or cannot reach you. However, that person cannot trade, withdraw funds or view your account balances. FINRA, the SEC and the North American Securities Administrators Association asked investors in August 2025 to contact their firm and add one. You can name more than one trusted contact. You can also change the designation at any time.
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION PHISHING SCAM TARGETS RETIREES
Families can help protect older adults by adding trusted contacts, verifying urgent calls and blocking online Social Security changes. (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)
2) Ask about holds on suspicious withdrawals
Under FINRA Rule 2165, brokerage firms can place a temporary hold on disbursements when they reasonably believe financial exploitation may be happening. That hold can last up to 55 business days. In January 2026, FINRA proposed extending the window to 145 business days. Ask any firm holding a pension, brokerage or annuity account about its policy on disbursements after an address change.
3) Verify urgent calls before sending money
When a caller claims a grandchild is in trouble or a federal agent needs immediate action, hang up. Then call back using a number you already have, not the number in the message. The FTC found that 41% of older adults who reported losing $10,000 or more to impersonation scams in 2024 said a phone call was the initial point of contact. That makes one simple habit especially important: verify the story before you act.
4) Block online changes to Social Security
Social Security lets you block electronic and automated telephone access to your account record. Once blocked, no one can change your direct deposit information or mailing address online or through the automated phone system. After that, any changes must go through a live SSA representative at 1-800-772-1213 or a field office visit. FINRA also operates a free Securities Helpline for Seniors at 844-574-3577, Monday through Friday, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. ET.
Identity theft recovery is harder on your own
Even strong account protections may not catch every scam attempt. That is why identity theft monitoring and recovery support can help families respond faster when personal information gets exposed or misused.
Some identity theft protection services monitor dark web marketplaces, data broker sites and people-search sites for exposed Social Security numbers, addresses and other personal information. If fraud happens, recovery support may help contact creditors, file disputes with the three credit bureaus and organize the documentation needed to restore an identity.
OUTSMART HACKERS WHO ARE OUT TO STEAL YOUR IDENTITY
Older Americans remain prime targets for identity theft because scammers can exploit exposed Social Security numbers, birth dates and addresses. (Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson)
Some plans also include identity theft insurance for eligible recovery costs, such as lost wages and legal fees.
No service prevents every misuse of an older adult’s identity. However, family monitoring and fraud resolution can shorten the time between when theft happens and when you or someone in your family acts on it.
See my tips and best picks on Best Identity Theft Protection at Cyberguy.com
Kurt’s key takeaways
Grandparents have become a prime target because scammers know where the money is and how to create panic fast. A familiar voice, a stolen Social Security number or a fake emergency can turn one phone call into a devastating loss. The best defense starts before the call comes. Add trusted contacts to financial accounts, block online Social Security changes, verify urgent requests through a number you already know and talk openly with family about scam warning signs. Identity theft protection can also help spot exposed personal information and speed up recovery if fraud happens. No family can stop every scam attempt. However, a simple plan can give older adults more time, more backup and a better chance of keeping their money safe.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Is enough being done to stop scammers from using AI voices and stolen data to target grandparents? Let us know by writing to us at Cyberguy.com
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.
Technology
A warrantless wiretap law is about to expire — but surveillance networks aren’t actually ‘going dark’
Congress has failed to pass a three-week extension of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), with the House voting 218-198 against reauthorizing the controversial warrantless wiretapping authority through July 2nd. After a short-term extension earlier this year, the spying program now appears set to lapse for at least a week. This is the nightmare scenario FISA’s proponents have been warning about — but it doesn’t actually mean the US has lost its surveillance capabilities.
Proponents of a clean extension claim a lapse will hinder intelligence agencies’ efforts to thwart potential terrorist attacks, with surveillance networks “going dark”. Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) stressed the importance of reauthorizing Section 702 ahead of the World Cup. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) has said even a brief lapse would be disastrous. “Democrats in the Senate are playing political games right now with the lives of Americans,” he told reporters Wednesday. “It’s a very dangerous situation.”
In March, the FISA court recertified surveillance under Section 702 until 2027. The Brennan Center for Justice notes that a lapse won’t allow telecom companies to flout requests to hand over communications information to the NSA and other spy agencies. In 2008, after Yahoo failed to comply with a Section 702 request during a lapse, the FISA court ruled that the directives issued under Section 702 are effective while the certification is in place — even in the event of a lapse.
“The phrase ‘going dark’ is significantly misleading,” Andrea Sawka Fiegl, the senior policy director for media and technology at Common Cause, said on a Tuesday press call. Fiegl added that companies don’t choose whether they participate in surveillance under Section 702. If they don’t comply after being served with a directive, they face fines starting at $250,000 a day.
“The ‘going dark’ framing is basically a pressure tactic designed to strip Congress of its leverage to negotiate reforms by creating this false binary,” Fiegl said. “There is ample time for Congress to consider and pass reforms.”
Among those reforms are a warrant requirement for queries involving US persons, including so-called “backdoor searches” in which intelligence agencies identify a foreign target with ties to a US person, and then search that person’s communications, thus granting them access to their desired US target. Reformers also want to prohibit intelligence agencies from buying Americans’ data from private brokers to get around warrant requirements.
“Every day that Section 702 is in effect without reforms is a day that Americans’ rights are under threat,” Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) said in a statement Wednesday night, after Senate Republicans blocked his request for a five-week extension of Section 702 with new transparency requirements. “If there is going to be an extension of these authorities, there needs to be some guardrails or at least some transparency that would allow Congress and the American people to understand the abuses that have taken place and the need for reforms.”
Though President Donald Trump and Republican leaders in both chambers have called for a clean reauthorization of Section 702, there’s bipartisan appetite for reform — and a handful of Republican holdouts stand in the way of a clean reauthorization. Most Democrats — even some who have supported reauthorization in the past — have objected to a clean extension due to Trump’s appointment of Bill Pulte as acting director of national intelligence.
-
South Dakota46 seconds ago
SD Lottery Millionaire for Life winning numbers for June 11, 2026
-
Tennessee4 minutes agoTennessee Baseball Transfer Commits To SEC School | Rocky Top Insider
-
Texas9 minutes agoReunion Tower lights up Dallas for FIFA World Cup
-
Utah16 minutes agoTwo Utah court clerks charged after allegedly harboring illegal immigrants | Fox News Video
-
Vermont19 minutes ago
VT Lottery Gimme 5, Pick 3 results for June 11, 2026
-
Virginia24 minutes agoVirginia Lottery Pick 3 Night, Pick 3 Day results for June 11, 2026
-
Washington31 minutes ago‘Attack on democracy’: Trump threatens DC home rule pending mayoral election
-
Wisconsin34 minutes agoWisconsin Lottery Pick 3, Pick 4 results for June 11, 2026
