March 2010 April 2010 May 2010 June 2010 July 2010
August 2010
September 2010 October 2010
November 2010
December 2010
January 2011
February 2011 March 2011 April 2011 May 2011 June 2011 July 2011 August 2011 September 2011 October 2011 November 2011 December 2011 January 2012 February 2012 March 2012 April 2012 May 2012 June 2012 July 2012 August 2012 September 2012 October 2012 November 2012 December 2012 January 2013 February 2013 March 2013 April 2013 May 2013 June 2013 July 2013 August 2013 September 2013 October 2013 November 2013 December 2013 January 2014 February 2014 March 2014 April 2014 May 2014 June 2014 July 2014 August 2014 September 2014 October 2014 November 2014 December 2014 January 2015 February 2015 March 2015 April 2015 May 2015 June 2015 July 2015 August 2015 September 2015 October 2015 November 2015 December 2015 January 2016 February 2016 March 2016 April 2016 May 2016 June 2016 July 2016 August 2016 September 2016 October 2016 November 2016 December 2016 January 2017 February 2017 March 2017 April 2017 May 2017 June 2017 July 2017 August 2017 September 2017 October 2017 November 2017 December 2017 January 2018 February 2018 March 2018 April 2018 May 2018 June 2018 July 2018 August 2018 September 2018 October 2018 November 2018 December 2018 January 2019 February 2019 March 2019 April 2019 May 2019 June 2019 July 2019 August 2019 September 2019 October 2019 November 2019 December 2019 January 2020 February 2020 March 2020 April 2020 May 2020 June 2020 July 2020 August 2020 September 2020 October 2020 November 2020 December 2020 January 2021 February 2021 March 2021 April 2021 May 2021 June 2021 July 2021 August 2021 September 2021 October 2021 November 2021 December 2021 January 2022 February 2022 March 2022 April 2022 May 2022 June 2022 July 2022 August 2022 September 2022 October 2022 November 2022 December 2022 January 2023 February 2023 March 2023 April 2023 May 2023 June 2023 July 2023 August 2023 September 2023 October 2023 November 2023 December 2023 January 2024 February 2024 March 2024 April 2024
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
News Every Day |

Could a TikTok Ban Be a Second Patriot Act?

Could a TikTok Ban Be a Second Patriot Act?

Examining the case against dramatic action.

US President George W. Bush arrives to a
(FILIPPO MONTEFORTE/AFP via Getty Images)

The great irony is that, despite all the fear-mongering spewed out about Donald Trump ending democracy, it is mostly the Democrats who are taking shots at its most sacred freedoms: those of the First Amendment.

The House recently passed a bill, HR 7521, seeking to “ban” the popular app TikTok from America’s smartphones. The logic works like this: TikTok is owned by a Chinese company. Chinese companies are under the control of the Chinese Communists. Therefore, TikTok is brainwashing American youth while at the same time gathering their personal data for some undefined yet assumed nefarious use. TikTok thus should be banned.

No evidence has been presented for any of the assertions listed—no evidence the Chinese government exerts direct control over TikTok, whose contents are 100 percent user-created, no evidence the app has any purpose other than to make money, and no evidence the app collects data to use it in some way, nefarious or not. It just feels scary and bad, as in any other red scare, so the House moved to ban it. The Senate votes soon, and Joe Biden says he will sign the bill if it reaches him.

This is not the first time the government has tried to ban TikTok. In 2021, President Donald Trump issued an executive order against TikTok that was halted in federal court when a judge found it was “arbitrary and capricious.” Another judge characterized the national security threat posted by TikTok as “phrased in the hypothetical.” When the state of Montana tried to ban the app in 2023, a federal judge said that it “oversteps state power and infringes on the constitutional rights of users,” with a “pervasive undertone of anti-Chinese sentiment.” Candidate Trump now opposes the TikTok ban.

You’d think that was enough for TikTok. Yet note the ban is just on a Chinese company owning the app, and the bill allows for an American company or ally to buy TikTok and go on its merry way. It’s not a ban; it’s a hijacking. And don’t think the Chinese won’t find an American app to retaliate against. Listening, Apple and Android?

But that is not where the true First Amendment challenge lies, though “banning” the app can itself be seen as restricting speech in its raw form. The real challenge lies in the details of the TikTok bill, which proves to be another Patriot Act in hiding.

Section 2(a)(1) of the bill prohibits “foreign adversary controlled applications” (FACA) from operating in the U.S. The prohibition applies not just to the app itself but to app stores and Internet hosting providers. There’s even a provision for a penalty of $5,000 per user fine; TikTok has 170 million users.

Effectively, the bill creates a federal government kill switch preventing distribution of “prohibited” apps or websites at the hosting level—clear top-down central government censorship of speech, and absolutely unconstitutional under the First Amendment. Unless, of course, the weasel excuse is used that the actual killing of the imported app is carried out by Apple and Google as proxies without being touched by the Feds, the same trick currently used to gather American citizen data, in addition to direct hoovering up of material by the NSA on a scale the Chinese can only dream of.

What is a “foreign adversary controlled application” under Section 2(g)(3) of the new bill? Any social/content-sharing website, desktop app, mobile or VR app that has more than a million monthly active users creating content is a FACA when two conditions are met: First, if it is “controlled by a foreign adversary” or a subsidiary of or a successor to an entity controlled by a foreign adversary. Second, if the President determines it “presents a significant threat to the national security of the United States.”

The term “controlled by a foreign adversary” means that the company (a) is domiciled in, headquartered in, or organized under the laws of a foreign adversary country; or (b) has a 20 percent ownership group from one of those countries; or (c) is “subject to the direction or control of a foreign person or entity” from one of those countries (Section 2(g)(1). “Adversary” is currently defined elsewhere in the U.S. Code as Russia, China, North Korea or Iran, but can be changed to someday be, say, France (remember “Freedom Fries”?)

There in the details lies the real challenge to the First Amendment, a set of vague criteria that allow the president to ban websites and apps based on his own finding of threat. No appeals, no due process. Censorship.

Americans have a right to speak freely, and to listen/read/watch freely and make up their own minds. The Supreme Court in Lamont v. Postmaster General already ruled in 1965 that this right even extends to foreign propaganda (the case involved Soviet propaganda materials passing through the U.S. Mail.) In addition, the irony of the U.S. government showing concern for what a foreign company might do with user data when in the U.S. such data is openly for sale, including to the government itself, cannot be dismissed. The TikTok ban is bad law, probably unconstitutional, and generally unconscionable.

The TikTok bill is not the only current challenge to the First Amendment. As exposed by the Twitter Files and elsewhere, for years the Biden administration worked hand-in-glove with the big tech social media companies, Jack Dorsey’s old Twitter in particular, to censor speech. Various agencies, including those responsible for Covid-19 policy, would contact the media companies to demand wrongthink posts be taken down. Particularly offensive were conservative posts questioning the efficiency and safety of the Covid vaccine, and those dealing with election fraud.

The question of whether or not the government can do that—demanding specific online speech be killed—reached the Supreme Court, and oral arguments were held earlier this month in the case of Murthy v. Missouri. The Court seemed skeptical of the idea that such action by the government was unconstitutional on its face, as the states claimed. Instead, the justices’ questions seemed to lean toward how the censorship was done.

The government was free to persuade social media carriers, cajole them, argue with them but as long as the government did not force them to take something down, it was likely legal. The states contend the looming power of the federal government made each request, however bland and polite, into a threat. Same as when the mafia thug in the movies says, “Nice place you got here, hate to see anything happen to it if you’re late paying us.” In one interaction a government watchdog seeking to deep-six some posts stated, “the White House is considering its options” if the “voluntary” take down effort fails.

There was room for debate. Justice Alito stated, “When I see the White House and Federal officials repeatedly saying that Facebook and the Federal government should be partners…regular meetings, constant pestering…. Wow, I cannot imagine Federal officials taking that approach to print media.” Alito also thought the barrage of emails from the White House and others to the social media companies may have met the legal standard for coercion.

The states agreed, saying, “Pressuring platforms in back rooms, shielded from public view, is not using a bully pulpit. That’s just being a bully… We don’t need coercion as a theory. The government ‘cannot induce, encourage or promote’ to get private actors to do what government cannot: censor Americans’ speech.”

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson replied, “Whether or not the government can do this…depends on the application of our First Amendment jurisprudence. There may be circumstances in which the government could prohibit certain speech on the internet or otherwise. My biggest concern is that your view has the First Amendment hamstringing the government in significant ways.”

Justice Barrett seemed uncomfortable with the lower courts’ conclusion that the Biden administration could be banned not only from “coercion,” but also from any action that “significantly encourages” platforms to take down protected speech. “Encouragement would sweep in an awful lot,” she said.

Interactions between administration officials and news outlets are part of a valuable dialogue that is not prohibited by the First Amendment, said Justices Kavanaugh and Kagan. The Justices suggested instead there is a role for vigorous efforts by the government to combat bad speech, for example discouraging posts harmful to children or conveying antisemitic or Islamophobic messages.

The remarks of Brown et al. are frightening from a constitutional point of view, basically saying when the government is ineffective in creating dominant content of its own to address public messaging (i.e., “vaccines are safe”) it justifies proxy censorship to eliminate counter information.

A Supreme Court decision is expected in June.

The post Could a TikTok Ban Be a Second Patriot Act? appeared first on The American Conservative.

Симферополь

Эко-выставка «Эта удивительная планета»

Danielle Serdachny scores OT goal to lift Canada to 6-5 win over US in women’s hockey world final

Men’s volleyball: Long Beach sweeps UCI for Big West title; top seeds win in MIVA tourney

Couple who won Come Dine With Me posed as customs officers to steal drugs as part of scam

The Masters 2024: Rory McIlroy feels he can still win at Augusta National despite swing ‘feeling horrific’ in round two

Ria.city






Read also

Whitey Herzog, Cardinals' Hall of Fame manager who led team to World Series title, dies at 92

GOP lawmaker demands action from Japan PM on key issue impacting hundreds of US children abroad

Apple CEO says that he wants to increase investments in Vietnam

News, articles, comments, with a minute-by-minute update, now on Today24.pro

News Every Day

Четвертый том в серии ко Дню космонавтики

Today24.pro — latest news 24/7. You can add your news instantly now — here


News Every Day

Danielle Serdachny scores OT goal to lift Canada to 6-5 win over US in women’s hockey world final



Sports today


Новости тенниса
Елена Рыбакина

Елена Рыбакина поднялась в мировом рейтинге



Спорт в России и мире
Москва

«Гонка Героев» открывает сезон при поддержке ENERGY



All sports news today





Sports in Russia today

Москва

ЦСКА обыграл «Балтику» и вышел в финал Пути РПЛ Кубка России


Новости России

Game News

Today's Wordle answer for Saturday, April 13


Russian.city


Сергей Собянин

Собянин: Авторы материалов для «МЭШ» получили свыше семи тысяч грантов


Губернаторы России
Елена Волкова

В Светлогорске впервые пройдет культурный проект «Классика: история и современность»


Социальная работа на предприятии: современные тенденции и интересные кейсы

Трое подростков одновременно прокатились на электровелосипеде в Москве

Колонной под конвоем: в русских городах ОМОНовцы доставляют мигрантов в военкомат

Источник: В САО Москвы произошло ДТП с участием пяти легковых автомобилей


Певец Юрий Лоза посоветовал Серову задуматься над качеством своей музыки

В Ярославле две женщины подрались на концерте Григория Лепса

Юрий Грымов рассказал о съемках слишком "жесткого" клипа для Дианы Арбениной

Загадки халатов Федора Шаляпина


Елена Рыбакина поднялась в мировом рейтинге

Шнайдер проиграла Бадосе на старте турнира WTA в Штутгарте

Рыбакина о смене гражданства: «Я никому ничего не доказываю. В меня поверил Казахстан, чему я очень рада»

Циципас вышел на 12-е место в ATP по призовым за карьеру. Он заработал $30 млн



Шапки женские на Wildberries — скидки от 398 руб. (на новые оттенки)

Аддитивные технологии помогают "Норникелю" обрести импортонезависимость

Тема дня: Росавтодор: в 2024 году до четырех полос расширят 376 км федеральных трасс в рамках капремонта

Елена ШЕРИПОВА рассказала о секретах успешного прохождения кастинга в модельную школу


Искусственный интеллект на службе «Норникеля»

Поймали волну: в России продолжает расти спрос на речные круизы

Возможности получить ипотеку со скидкой расширил Сбер

Потомок поэта Александра Пушкина умерла из-за проблем с сердцем


Агентство Apriori Arts представляет серию концертов «Майская ночь» в Галерее “Нико”

В Главном управлении МЧС России по г. Москве состоялись проводы огнеборца на заслуженный отдых

У Сталина было не два родных сына, а четыре. И обо всех он заботился по мере своих возможностей

Сборная России по гандболу может сыграть с Ираном, Китаем и Южной Кореей



Путин в России и мире






Персональные новости Russian.city
Аранжировка

Аранжировка Песен. Аранжировка Музыки. Создание Аранжировок.



News Every Day

Четвертый том в серии ко Дню космонавтики




Friends of Today24

Музыкальные новости

Персональные новости