5 ms·
Disclaimer: IANAL. The Executive Branch (President, White House) has a responsibility to execute the law as legislated by the Legislative Branch (Congress) and
by Dalewyn 2y ago
Disclaimer: IANAL.
The Executive Branch (President, White House) has a responsibility to execute the law as legislated by the Legislative Branch (Congress) and judged by the Judicial Branch (Supreme Court) if applicable.
Trump is citing House Resolution 8038[1], Division D, Section 2, subsection A, paragraph 3[2] which states (emphasis mine):
>(3) EXTENSION.—With respect to a foreign adversary controlled application, the President may grant a 1-time extension of not more than 90 days with respect to the date on which this subsection would otherwise apply to such application pursuant to paragraph (2), if the President certifies to Congress that—
>(A) a path to executing a qualified divestiture has been identified with respect to such application;
>(B) evidence of significant progress toward executing such qualified divestiture has been produced with respect to such application; and
>(C) there are in place the relevant binding legal agreements to enable execution of such qualified divestiture during the period of such extension.
In plain English, this means Trump once he is President will have authority to order a one-time up-to 90-day extension to enforcing the ban if TikTok can present evidence that they are in the process of selling to an American entity.
If TikTok cannot present the evidence or they still do not complete a sale within the 90-day extension, the ban will apply and must be enforced by the President.
As the law in question was passed by Congress and signed into law by the President (Biden), the President (Biden and Trump) cannot overrule or otherwise refuse the law with an Executive Order. The President must enforce and act within the powers vested in him by the law.
It is questionable if Trump's claim of not penalizing violators of the law prior to an approved 90-day extension is legal; the law allows no such powers to the President.
Disclaimer: IANAL.
[1]: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/8038/text#toc-HA90B4270C291485E9911950A2789C181 https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/8038...
[2]: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/8038/text#HD11D9931331B4D92A682A90D5AD3EA2F https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/8038...
- IAmGraydon 2y ago>In plain English, this means Trump once he is President will have authority to order a one-time up-to 90-day extension to enforcing the ban if TikTok can present evidence that they are in the process of selling to an American entity. There is zero chance he can satisfy A, B, and C tomorrow. Zero.
- Dalewyn 2y agoI agree, the realistic chance of TikTok providing evidence of an active and ongoing sale process when they hadn't entertained even the mere thought of a sale is astronomically low. Then again, reality can be weird sometimes. Never say never until the fat lady sings.
- _yb2s 2y ago> It is questionable if Trump's claim of not penalizing violators of the law prior to an approved 90-day extension is legal; the law allows no such powers to the President. The president has the power to pardon, which could be interpreted in that way. I'm no legal scholar, but I think offering the pardon up front with the intention of circumventing the law would itself have been a crime up until the recent July supreme court ruling that now appears to make it perfectly legal: absolute immunity for all official acts including pardons.
- Dalewyn 2y agoYes, the legal question was decided last year by the Supreme Court (and it will work in all Presidents' favors going forward, Trump included). The question of duty however lies with Congress. The Executive Branch is tasked with executing the laws passed by Congress, and Congress always has the option of impeaching a President who refuses his duty to execute and enforce the law.
- sethammons 2y agoThey impeached Trump. Twice. Didn't do anything.
- Dalewyn 2y agoHe was acquitted on both counts, so no he wasn't impeached. In fact, there has never[1] been an impeached President in American history. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_impeachment_trial_in_the_United_States#List_of_trials https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_impeachment_trial_in_t...
- CyberDildonics 2y agohttps://time.com/5552679/impeached-presidents/ https://time.com/5552679/impeached-presidents/
- 2y ago