Hacker News Reader

Comment by hnpolicestate | Hacker News Reader

This is the 3rd time I'm trying to share a perspective that keeps getting flagged.

Bytedance does not have to divest because it's against the law for the U.S government to prevent Americans from reading, viewing or saying what they want. Will be struck down by SCOTUS.

Does this comply with HN's site guidelines?

View on HN

This law does not prevent Americans from reading, viewing, or saying anything. You will still be free to visit TikTok's web client and do that. This prevents US companies from doing business with the company (eg. ads, app distribution, etc).

TikTok isn't going away. It's changing owners.

There's existing laws about the citizenship of property owners (broadcase media for example).

I don’t know why you’re being flagged, but your constitutional analysis is wrong.

I think you're getting downvoted, because the right of congress to manage affairs interstate and foreign commerce has nothing to do with the content Americans read. The objection is ownership/controlling interest, and any SCOTUS ruling will have to speak to that, not first amendment issues.

I appreciate the feedback but I disagree. The law would prevent Google and Apple from hosting the TikTok APK on their app stores if the company refuses to divest, yes? I don't think it's legal for the government to tell Google or Apple what apps they can host.

It is absolutely legal. You are simply under-educated in this area. Read up and try again.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com