TikTok to Sue Trump Administration over Ban, as Soon as Tuesday | Hacker News Reader

TikTok to Sue Trump Administration over Ban, as Soon as Tuesday

npr.org

73 pointsmiscon71 comments

> 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.

Trump keeps firing anybody with competence, he seems to feel threatened by them.

Is it possible that the administration doesn’t actually want to ban Tik-Tok but simply remove them as a factor for the election?

Is Tik-Tok considered an election factor?

Rumor is it was the TikTok Teens who made Trump's recent rally such a disaster by mass registering for tickets and not attending.

Note at the end: "TikTok helps fund NPR content that appears on the social media platform."

What 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.

Seems bold considering China’s firewall and all the US social media and chat apps it’s banned.

Might be a good political argument but not a legal one.

The 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.

If 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.

> 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

Are you implying the USA is a totalitarian state now?

If orders like this are not overturned by the judicial system, then yes, it would be. But this order (or at least the lawyer-banning aspect) will be overturned because the US is not a totalitarian state.

Correct. It shows that Trump is subject to the law but the CCP does whatever it pleases. China blocks whatever it likes because it has no such legal standards.

Yes, the entire state apparatus bows to the whims of one man, which is almost definitionally a totalitarian state. We’re lucky, at the moment, that the totalitarian in charge has few concrete ideas and lacks the attention span to see through even those few.

Thank you. I can’t believe not everyone is seeing this.

Saudi Arabia is also a totalitarian regime. It suppresses speech, executes citizens prejudicially and extrajudicially even outside their own borders, arrests and charges women's rights activists of treason, dozens of executions by beheading of non-violent drug offenders per year, human rights activists are arrested and imprisoned without trial, and so on.

Maybe we should just stop doing business with Saudi Arabia too, is that your point? No more Saudi Arabia oil for the U.S. or even all of the western world? In fact they're still treated as a U.S. ally.

I wish I could upvote this 1000 times

Yes, we absolutely should stop doing any business with both Saudi Arabia and China, both of which are brutal murderous totalitarian regimes.

Failing that, however, considering the two options for global social networks are precisely limited to

a) there are no global social networks b) there are global social networks but only ones that are directly controlled by the CCP

I'm pretty alright with a).

No but we need their oil and alliance. It benefits us so that is ok—oops, I’ve said too much.

What do you suggest doing though? It would seem that giving them lots of money and arms isn’t a good way of dealing with them either.

oh we totally should. The US has historically extracted resources from regimes who play nice. When they stop playing nice or might want something a little better, the US goes all Iraq/Iran/Libya on them.

The foreign aid of high income countries (US, EU, etc.) is always used to prop up autocratic governments for resource extractions. It's how high income states enforce autocratic policies outside their borders, in order to keep their citizens happy with cheap oil and cheap plastic crap.

"There are exceptions to that power that lawyers for TikTok will likely underscore in their litigation. For instance, the authority cannot be used to regulate or prohibit either "personal communication" or sharing of film and other forms of media, which TikTok can argue is the primary use of its app."

It’s both.

"China does it too" is not as strong argument as it sounds.

it is stronger when the reciprocal action is levied towards China. it isn't whataboutism it's tit for tat and it's as old as diplomacy.

It's how reciprocity in international trade works.

I’m Chinese but you wouldn’t preface my actions with “consider China’s firewall.”

That depends on whether you're controlled by the Chinese state. If you are, someone might well say this. The root question is whether TT/BD is/are controlled by the state. Given the size of the company and the CCP drive to control "large" (a flexible concept - which intensified after Xi Jinping came to power - it is not unreasonable to assume the state has significant influence.

You can say that about anything under the jurisdiction of Chinese law. It's not like they have a choice. US companies are also "controlled" by the state in the same manner we are accusing these companies because the Chinese government can compel them to release their data to them in the same way national security letters can be used, and in the same way NSA data harvesting is being used.

The difference right now between China and the US is that everybody knows China is monitoring everyone—even Chinese citizens.

I mean, everyone knows the US is monitoring everyone, except Americans seem to have some mental clutch where they keep denying the fact.

China didn't ban Google or Facebbook. China has laws that required Google and Facebook to keep their servers within Chinese borders and they chose to not follow those rules, hence preventing them from operating in China. Whereas Tiktok has complied with all the laws in US thus far but still banned because of baseless national security concerns. And that's the issue here.

That's not what Wikipedia says (which is not to say your statement is false or wrong):

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_of_Facebook#China

> In China, Facebook was blocked following the July 2009 Ürümqi riots because Xinjiang independence activists were using Facebook as part of their communications network, and Facebook denied giving the information of the activists.[12] Some Chinese users also believed that Facebook would not succeed in China after Google China's problems.[13] Renren (formerly Xiaonei) has many features similar to Facebook, and complies with PRC Government regulations regarding content filtering.

> As of 20 August 2013, there have been reports of Facebook being partially unblocked in China.[14] However, according to the "Blocked in China" website, Facebook is still blocked as of December 7, 2019.[15] Facebook is not blocked in the autonomous zones of Hong Kong and Macau, as well as the province of Taiwan. Facebook is currently working on a censorship project for China, where a third party would be allowed to regulate on Facebook and control popular stories that come around. This would be a huge attempt on Facebook to get back into China.[16]

Anyone 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? :)

The 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.

Is this an attempt by ByteDance to retain control of the company?

It is an attempt by ByteDance to eliminate any pressing need to sell their US customers to a non-Chinese company.

There's two orders out. The 2nd one targets ByteDance and prevents US companies from doing business with them.

Various sides fighting a proxy PR war in election year and media (and tecnorati) taking the bait...

I 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/?...

I 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.

Your points about TikTok's content compared to Twitter's content are interesting, but seem anecdotal and personal to you. I use Twitter almost exclusively for art, and I try to avoid any politics trending or people attacking each other or Trump. TikTok has an abundance of politically-charged content from people with different political views, but it's just not always on the surface (although sometimes it is).

Completely 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.

You 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.

Yes, 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.

That'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.

There is no requirement that US based lawyers must be US citizens.

There 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...

A 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.

> Not being able to get the exact lawyer you want is not the same as your due process being violated.

It absolutely is.

Since when does the US apply its constitutional rights to foreign entities?

The argument is that those presidents were generally smarter and more capable then Trump. Their executive orders were actually legal or if dubious, they were illegal in way that practically passed.

Trump does not seem to posses that ability. His strengths in in completely different areas.

precedent

Just wait until the CCP gets their pile of lawsuits over unfair tech bans. Oh wait...

I 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.

They're not forced to sell. They would simply lose access to the US market. They've already lost access to the Indian market.

No. 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.

Are 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.

I 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.

Don't Google and Apple have to follow US law and ban the app in all markets?

Here‘s a slightly related HN post which just makes it to the HN front page as well: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24090923

Seems 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.

Public rhetoric is one thing, but private discussions go on with the president from intelligence officials all the time.

The 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.

Regarding the retaining US lawyers part - I think it would fall under FARA:

https://www.justice.gov/nsd-fara

The 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

I'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?"

If 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.

Trump 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?

It'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.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com