On August 24, U.S. local time, tiktok formally sued the trump government. Just a few days ago, the non-profit organization American wechat Users Association sued the trump administration in a federal court in San Francisco. So far, trump signed two administrative orders on the 6th to prohibit trading with wechat and tiktok, both of which have been challenged by law. The two lawsuits not only show that the enterprises and users actively defend their legitimate rights and interests with the help of law, but also constitute a test of the so-called “judicial independence” in the United States. < p > < p > for a long time, the United States boasts of the separation of legislative, executive and judicial powers, and is proud of the system design of “separation of powers and checks and balances”. However, in recent years, the president of the United States has used executive orders more and more frequently to bypass the legislative process of Congress, which has already aroused concerns about the excessive expansion of American executive power. After the trump administration came to power, it extended the concept of national security infinitely, and maliciously suppressed Chinese enterprises such as Huawei and byte jump. This is not only a trample on the market principle, but also a violation of the spirit of the rule of law. < / P > < p > specifically, in terms of this administrative order against wechat and tiktok, both the statement issued by the parent company of tiktok on the 23rd and the litigation reasons put forward by the “American wechat Users Association” mentioned that the administrative order violated due process of law. In the United States, where procedural justice and substantive justice are equally important, procedural legitimacy is even specially required by the Fifth Amendment of the constitution. However, wechat and tiktok bans are not clear about the specific definition of “Prohibition of trading”, which is almost a “pocket crime” set by the US government at its discretion. However, in terms of substance, the two prohibitions are even more difficult to say “justice”. Both wechat and tiktok are social media platforms with an extremely wide user base in the United States and around the world. The government’s threat to shut down such a mainstream platform is not only unprecedented in the history of the United States, but also suspected of violating the right to freedom of expression of a large number of people. Freedom of expression is protected by the first amendment of the United States Constitution. Therefore, in the context of the current political polarization in the United States, whether the United States courts can adhere to judicial independence and determine that the two administrative orders are unconstitutional is of great concern. < / P > < p > now the U.S. government has been sued for wechat and tiktok injunctions. According to the regulations, the Department of justice should be one of the direct responding departments. However, the current attorney general, William Barr, has been repeatedly accused of “eroding the independence of the judicial system” for political purposes. Last month, Barr also took over his duties, instead of the head of the economic department, reprimanded American enterprises for being “willing to be pawns of Chinese forces” and cooperated with pompeio to deliver a speech attacking China’s economic policies, which was called one of the “United States” by foreign media. Considering Barr’s performance, we may not be able to expect him to make an impartial and objective statement on these two Chinese applications, and we can even expect that there may be more groundless defamation. However, as the “final barrier” of the spirit of the rule of law in the United States, whether the court can keep the bottom line or not remains to be seen.