Why should it? It will just point to an array of size 0, which is perfectly valid.
I think the confusion here arises from the ambiguity of representing the absence of data either bye an array of size 0 set to null (or between an empty string and a string reference set to null for that matter). Both are valid ways to indicate such absence and it would arguably make more sense to have only one. Hence, on some databases an empty string equals the NULL value and vices versa and some programming languages (I think, new versions of C# are one of them) allow to specify references to never be null, also eliminating said ambiguity.