President-elect Donald Trump's latest legal briefing is a bridge too far even for the Wall Street Journal's conservative editorial board, which called his argument to save TikTok "extraordinary in several ways, none of them good."
Trump — who once signed an executive order four years ago threatening to ban the popular social media app — this month asked the Supreme Court to let him "save" TikTok ahead of a looming nationwide ban set to take effect Jan. 19 if its Chinese parent company doesn’t sell it to a U.S. company.
Trump asked the high court to delay the deadline until after he returns to the Oval Office so his administration can "seek a negotiated resolution." Doing so would allow the case to be resolved without the Supreme Court interfering.
The Journal's editorial board on Tuesday afternoon noted his amicus brief, which the high court will hear on Jan. 10, "implores the Justices to give him a chance to apply his 'dealmaking' skills to rescue TikTok from the Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act that passed Congress in April."
ALSO READ: Merrick Garland's last task and the explosive evidence that could save America
The board was no fan of Trump's argument, which it said essentially "wants the Supreme Court to treat him like a second President with Joe Biden so he can save TikTok."
"The brief is extraordinary in several ways, none of them good," the board said, later adding: "Mr. Trump wants the Court to treat him as if he’s already President before he’s inaugurated."
Trump for all intents and purposes is a "private citizen" until he's inaugurated, the board countered. He is also in essence "asking the Justices to let him rewrite a law he doesn’t like," it added.
Trump, the board said, "instructs the Court that he deserves this power because he won the election and is a wizard on social media. Really, that’s his claim."
The board urged the justices to rebuff the MAGA leader and his argument that he has a special standing to represent U.S. TikTok users.
"We trust the Justices will ignore this amicus sophistry," the Journal's board concluded.
