TikTok Isn’t a U.S. State Actor (So Far)–Brooks v. TikTok

January 19, 2026 · by · in Content Regulation

This is a pro se/IFP case, so odds were high it was going to fail no matter what. Brooks says two of his TikTok accounts were terminated and another demonetized. He claims the account restrictions violated the First Amendment because TikTok became a state actor in response to the federal government’s relentless coercions of TikTok. Like so many other account termination and content removal cases, the court dismisses the claim.

The court says TikTok is not a state actor:

Plaintiff has not shown that any specific actions TikTok took on its platforms were traceable to any actionable federal rule to censor certain viewpoints….

Plaintiff offers no plausible factual allegations that the federal government coerced TikTok to regulate specific speech or viewpoints. As previously explained, Plaintiff’s assertions regarding government oversight generally are insufficient to support the inference that the government pressured TikTok into taking any specific action with respect to speech critical to the government. All Plaintiff has alleged is that TikTok was aware of a generalized federal concern with “improper manipulation” by foreign influence and that TikTok took steps to address that concern….

He alleges TikTok agreed to government oversight over its algorithm and moderation systems and a White House Fact Sheet announcing TikTok would operate under “strict rules” ensuring its content was “free from improper manipulation.” But nothing in these allegations support a reasonable inference that an agreement was made to regulate certain viewpoints, despite Plaintiff’s speculation to the contrary

This outcome is hardly surprising, but notice its fragility. We don’t know all of the details of the TikTok divestment that Trump claims to have brokered. However, the federal government’s extensive involvement in many aspects of TikTok 2.0 could very well flip the court’s reasoning in this case. For example, if the buyer group intentionally turns TikTok’s algorithm into Trump evangelism (which appears to be one of the driving motivations of the group purportedly buying TikTok), TikTok will more closely resemble a government mouthpiece than a private publisher making independent editorial decisions.

There is a deep irony that Brooks claims TikTok became a US government actor because Congress banned TikTok for purportedly being a Chinese government actor. It’s a reminder that Congress didn’t oppose government control of TikTok; Congress just wanted to be the government that controlled it. Due to its gamesmanship, Congress apparently handed control of TikTok to an authoritarian who every day disregards Congress’ powers. Well done, Congress.

Case Citation: Brooks v. TikTok Inc., 2026 WL 127940 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 13, 2026). CourtListener page.

Selected Posts About State Action Claims