Montana Compares TikTok to ‘Cancer-Causing Radio’ in Defense of State’s Ban

In what could be seen as a shocking comparison, the state of Montana recently defended its decision to ban the popular mobile app, TikTok, by comparing the app to “cancer-causing radio.” This controversial statement was made in response to the lawsuit that was filed by three Montana citizens that alleged the State had violated their First and Fifth Amendment rights by banning the app.

The lawsuit was brought up in response to the State of Montana banning the popular app earlier this year. The app was banned, in part, due to the company’s ties to the Chinese government. In the lawsuit, the State argued that it was justified in restricting the use of the app in order to protect its citizens from potential security and privacy risks.

In a recent filing to the court, Montana compared the dangers that come with using the app to “cancer-causing radio.” This comparison was made in an attempt to demonstrate that while there are certain risks associated with using the technology, it does not automatically render them harmful or dangerous.

The comparison was met with backlash from both sides of the aisle. Those in support of the ban argued that the comparison was an attempt to downplay the security and privacy risks associated with the app and its ties to the Chinese government, while those opposed to the ban argued that the comparison was in bad taste.

Regardless of the criticism, Montana continued to stand behind its decision, citing the potential risks associated with the app and the inability of the public to adequately protect themselves from those risks. In addition, the state’s legal team argued that the “reasonable regulations” imposed by the State in banning the app were necessary to protect the public from potential dangers.

For now, the case is ongoing and it remains to be seen whether or not the State of Montana’s ban on TikTok will stand or be overturned. In the meantime, the comparison of the app to “cancer-causing radio” is sure to be a talking point among both those in support and those in opposition of the ban.