7 ms·
TikTok to Sue Trump Administration over Ban, as Soon as Tuesday
- Firebrand 6y agoIs this an attempt by ByteDance to retain control of the company?
- blumomo 6y agoHere‘s a slightly related HN post which just makes it to the HN front page as well: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24090923 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24090923
- seanmcdirmid 6y agoCompletely expected. Trump doesn’t really have a good track record in coming up with legal executive orders, while Tiktok is completely in their rights to contest this order. And...judicial review is what sets the USA apart from China.
- djsumdog 6y agoYou realize US presidents have imposed embargo via executive orders against nations for decades right? Cuba? Huawei? Whether you think it's right or wrong, legally, it has prescient.
- seanmcdirmid 6y agoYes, but Trump, again, doesn’t have a good track record here. There are powers they have and powers they don’t have, they have to read up on law and tread carefully, Trump and whatever advisers he is listening to haven’t been shown to be apt at that.
- carlosdp 6y agoThat's not what he means. They consistently pass exec orders that at the core would be legal, if they allowed for due process, but they rush it or are incompetent so they get overturned. In this case, the order bans any US citizen from doing business with ByteDance, and doesn't make a carve out for retaining a US lawyer, which is a violation of due process and means a judge could overturn the order. If they just added that carve out, it would probably be entirely legally defensible. That one dumb mis-step could mean it gets overturned. This keeps happening with the Trump admin, it's the same reason the DACA repeal was overturned by the supreme court.
- oh_sigh 6y agoThere is no requirement that US based lawyers must be US citizens.
- carlosdp 6y agoThere is very much a constitutional requirement that the government can't tell you you can't have the lawyer you want because they are a US citizen. That's a clear violation of the 14th amendment right to due process...
- oh_sigh 6y agoA part of due process is the opportunity to be represented by counsel. Unless there are few or no quality lawyers who are not US citizens, I don't see how this would infringe on anyone's due process. Not being able to get the exact lawyer you want is not the same as your due process being violated.
- williesleg 6y agoNPR is a shill for the ccp. Everybody knows that.
- slowhadoken 6y agoSeems bold considering China’s firewall and all the US social media and chat apps it’s banned.
- puranjay 6y agoMight be a good political argument but not a legal one.
- djsumdog 6y agoThe legal argument is much more clear though. The US can impose embargo via executive order. Keep in mind Australia dropped Huawei over security concerns for their national broadband network back in 2012. China is a totalitarian regime that suppresses speech and is reeducating an entire ethnic group, possibly even forcing them into factory jobs.
- carlosdp 6y agoIf you read the article, they are also contesting the fact the order was rushed and bans ByteDance from retaining US lawyers once the ban is in effect, which is a violation of due process. So the legal argument from ByteDance actually has merit in that respect, regardless of the political debate.
- alfiedotwtf 6y ago> bans ByteDance from retaining US lawyers once the ban is in effect, which is a violation of due process To counter the parent’s comment, this sounds like something a totalitarian state would do
- jychang 6y agoAre you implying the USA is a totalitarian state now?
- 6y ago
- Hnaomyiph 6y agoJust wait until the CCP gets their pile of lawsuits over unfair tech bans. Oh wait...
- techntoke 6y agoI'd start the questioning like this... "On an average day how many kids under 13 do you think join TikTok without their parents knowledge?" "On an average day, how many teens under 18 and preteens dance in a manner that would be considered provocative on your platform?"
- kccqzy 6y agoIf the reason for banning TikTok is to "protect the kids" why not say so in the order, instead of using some vague "national security" excuse? Clearly the TikTok ban had nothing to do with young kids using it or dancing provocatively, and the administration clearly isn't thinking about the kids when the ban was ordered.
- techntoke 6y agoTrump is saying he is likely going to issue an executive order to extend unemployment due to national security. You don't think he would do the same for TikTok, especially when all these underage and often preteen kids data is being sent to China?
- cmurf 6y agoIt's retaliation, both for the kids and for TikTok, for snatching up all those Tulsa Trump rally tickets, and making him look bad because fewer people showed up.
- boublepop 6y agoSeems natural. The only proof he has of the claims of risks against national security seems to be his typical wild ramblings of “a lot of people say! Everyone knows! Just read the manuals, read the books!” While not being able to mention a single name or fact. If trump forces trough this sale, the EU are bring morons if they don’t forcefully take over EU facebooks and LinkedIn business by Wednesday next week.
- chrisco255 6y agoPublic rhetoric is one thing, but private discussions go on with the president from intelligence officials all the time.
- dodobirdlord 6y agoThe claim isn’t a dispute about the legitimacy of the national security grounds, that will probably come later. The claim is that the EO prohibits retaining US lawyers, which is pretty clearly a violation of due process.
- blisseyGo 6y agoRegarding the retaining US lawyers part - I think it would fall under FARA: https://www.justice.gov/nsd-fara https://www.justice.gov/nsd-fara
- dodobirdlord 6y agoThe EO imposes a prohibition on financial transactions between US citizens (and probably also residents?) and ByteDance, so they wouldn't be able to pay their lawyers even if registered. So it's essentially a ban on having lawyers
- carlosdp 6y ago> The source familiar with TikTok's internal discussions on the matter says the president's order appeared rushed and did not include carveouts or exceptions for TikTok to maintain any legal representation, which the company plans to argue is a violation of due process rights. This is the important part for me and the reason the order could actually be overturned and need to be redone. The administration keeps doing these half-assed orders that would go through fine if they just did the process correctly, but for one reason or another they seem incapable of it.
- nine_zeros 6y agoI am not opposed to a ban. However, I am opposed to the executive having the power to force companies (foreign or otherwise) to sell assets. We are really entering developing country territory here.
- chrisco255 6y agoThey're not forced to sell. They would simply lose access to the US market. They've already lost access to the Indian market.
- nine_zeros 6y agoNo. Trumps delayed ban is for a wiggle room for an American company (Microsoft) to acquire US and other non-China assets. This effectively means that the app is not a national security threat but the ownership of it is. And that threat was as determined by the executive without any charges. I am opposed to such unilateral powers where the executive plays godfather and decides the rules of the game.
- abc-xyz 6y agoAre you against executive orders in general or just this one? Because surely one of the most popular social media platforms in the world, operated by the enemy, with access to troves of personal user data that can be used for election interference, blackmail, propaganda, etc. is a national security threat. And yes, other social media platforms, including Facebook, pose national security threats as well, but it’s up to the elected officials to decide how significant the threat is, and when/if it’s necessary to take action. With regard to TikTok and WeChat, I’d say it’s long overdue, and I personally hope the list will be expanded to include all software and hardware operated by Chinese companies.
- nine_zeros 6y agoI am against this one. If Congress comes with a bill which clearly defined which companies can be banned or forced to sell assets, I am ok with it because the rules are clearly defined. However, with an executive order as this one, the rules of "national security" will keep changing with the political desires of the president in charge. Maybe someday a President will come and ask you to divest your Tesla shares because the President at the time doesn't like Elon musk. This is too much power in the hands of one person, especially an erratic one as the current POTUS.
- justinzollars 6y agoI support TikTok in this matter. I'm not comfortable with the United States banning companies. We should strive to be the best place on earth to do business in. We are an open country and we benefit from being open. We benefit from competition. If I'm afraid China is taking my personal information, it's up to me, the consumer, to delete the app. It's up to Apple to design APIs to prevent real theft of such things as passwords left on your clipboard, or location data. Many people will point to the fact that TikTok is controlled by a single party, the CCP, and may push various points of view. I don't see how that is different than Twitter whose employees give to the Democrats at a North Korean level of popular support [1] (99.8% of political gifts given to non GOP candidates). Twitter famously shadow ban conservatives, cause liberal ideas to "trend", and push a political agenda even if I'm there just for technology news. Again, comparing TikTok to Twitter, when I load TikTok I see music videos and no politics. When I load Twitter I see riots, violence and people complaining about Trump (24/7 365). It's like looking into the depths of the abyss. Twitter provides a platform for countries to threaten one another, for example Iran threatens Israel on its platform. TikTok provides a platform to make music videos. How is again Twitter superior? One other point, I wish to make is the way we are handling the transfer of TikTok to Microsoft. We are literally taking TikTok's business and giving it to Microsoft with a "Big fee" paid to the Federal Government. Considering China's history, this will offend them. What if they did the same thing to us? What if they did not trust Apple's business in China? What if they stole Apple's Chinese business, and gave it to Tencent with a fee paid to the CCP? TikTok is a major accomplishment because it's the first US top rated social network not designed in the United States. This is something to be celebrated and a cause to inspire us to compete to make something even better. Taking it, transferring it or banning it is not the way to go. [1] https://www.fec.gov/data/receipts/individual-contributions/?contributor_employer=twitter&two_year_transaction_period=2020&min_date=01%2F01%2F2019&max_date=12%2F31%2F2020 https://www.fec.gov/data/receipts/individual-contributions/?...
- chrischen 6y agoI would argue banning TikTok if it had politics would be even worse. Just today Facebook deleted the QAnon group. In a free speech society, such control of “what’s good for us” should not be necessary. While China’s authoritarian government can certainly be abused, they often ban things under the same excuse of “promoting harmony” and to ensure the public does not have Access to misinformation (nor information harmful to the regime). We’re not much more different if we have powerful players who can arbitrarily ban things under the same goals, even if momentarily altruistic.
- 627467 6y agoVarious sides fighting a proxy PR war in election year and media (and tecnorati) taking the bait...
- mike503 6y agoAnyone else find it amusing one of the biggest “things” going on at the moment is not a global pandemic, racial injustice/social activism, but the country banning a silly social media platform? :)
- boublepop 6y agoThe main reason it’s being banned by Trump is very likely because it has been an extremely effective platform for sharing videos of police and military brutality against the protesting population of America and of cause pro-science/anti Trumpism content telling people to wear masks and social distance. This isn’t just a silly app being banned. This is a major blow against freedom of speech being pushed forwards with a silly cover excuse of “national security” all happening up to an election.
- m0zg 6y agoNote at the end: "TikTok helps fund NPR content that appears on the social media platform."
- mosselman 6y agoWhat are you trying to say? You make it sound as if you did some investigations and found this out on your own, yet the statement is right there. In order for your comment to be meaningful it would need to include something more than just the excerpt, like an analysis or opinion.