Hacker News Reader

Comment by ripped_britches | Hacker News Reader

For those saying there’s no executive order yet or that Trump is not president yet, the point is that they received confirmation that there will be an executive order, meaning they can rely on a 90 day extension of non-enforcement.

So while there is some irony with Trump having previously supported the ban, the practical reality is that he and Susquehanna and the Republicans all are winning big on this one, from a political/financial lens.

View on HN

[meta] why is this the only comment I can't vote on?

The issue is Trump doesn’t have legal authority to issue an executive order delaying the ban, executive orders “execute” the law, delaying would be the opposite of the law, a law that was held up 9–0 as constitutional by the Supreme Court face palm

There is some precedent for doing this. State-level cannabis legalization rests on non-enforcement at the federal level, at which it remains scheduled.

Sure, but there’s no executive order saying we promise not to enforce it (I assume?), that would be counter to the law even if the absence of enforcement is a legal grey area

Either way it feels like there are games being played, and the country is watching because tik tok is so heavily used by so many people

As far as I can tell, what happened is this law was passed in the heat of the moment (Gaza war), but it turned out to be massively unpopular and ineffective at shoring up US support for the outgoing administration's foreign policy, and even after its moment had passed the combination of the arguments raised by the lawyers for ByteDance and the phrasing of the very unique, very specific bill got it through the Supreme Court, so now everyone's been stuck with trying to figure out how to get rid of it.

And notice how Marlboro didn’t start selling cannabis everywhere? Apple and Google(and their legal teams) have to decide if not following the law on the nonbinding word of a 77yr old man’s promise. The law itself allows companies to be held liable up to 5 years after each infraction.

Yes he does. Form the article:

> The law banning TikTok, which was scheduled to go into effect Sunday, allows the president to grant a 90-day extension before the ban is enforced, provided certain criteria are met.

and

> After the Supreme Court greenlit the law on Friday, the Biden administration issued a statement saying it would not enforce the ban, leaving that responsibility to Trump.

The criteria is; they must have a plan to sell.

That’s following the law. It doesn’t require an executive order. But the law requires proving to congress that the conditions for an extension are met

The chance for the 90 day extension under the law goes away before Trump takes office. He can’t legally give them a 90 day extension.

He can just buy a sufficient stake to count as a "divestiture" under the law.

I was dumbfounded too, but NBC explains in this same article:

> "The law banning TikTok [...] allows the president to grant a 90-day extension before the ban is enforced, provided certain criteria are met."

Those criteria have not been met and we are passed the deadline in which that extension could be applied.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com