Trump’s Controversial Executive Orders on TikTok: What You Need to Know
On Monday night, President Trump executed a series of executive orders that raise significant questions regarding their legality. Among these orders was one that targeted the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act (PAFACA), commonly referred to as the TikTok ban. This action was seen as an attempt to nullify established federal laws and constitutional guidelines with a mere signature, igniting a heated debate around executive power and its limits in safeguarding national security.
Understanding Trump’s Justification for Delaying TikTok Ban Enforcement
In his announcement, Trump cited his “unique constitutional responsibility for the national security of the United States,” emphasizing the timing of the law’s implementation just one day before he assumed the presidency. He directed the Department of Justice to hold off on enforcing the ban for a period of 75 days, suggesting that this window would allow his administration to assess the situation and determine a viable course of action regarding TikTok’s future in the U.S. This decision has raised eyebrows, given the bipartisan concerns over data privacy and security risks associated with the app.
Trump’s Proposal: A Controversial Government Acquisition of TikTok
Publicly, Trump has floated the idea of the U.S. government purchasing a significant stake in TikTok, specifically half of the Chinese-owned application. In his remarks, he stated, “TikTok is worthless, worthless if I don’t approve it; it has to close.” His proposal implies that if the deal goes through, TikTok could potentially be valued at up to a trillion dollars. Trump argued that the U.S. should receive a substantial portion of this value, suggesting a partnership that could yield immense financial benefits for the country, potentially worth around $500 billion.
Contradictory Stances: From Banning TikTok to Seeking Ownership
Trump’s historical stance on TikTok has been paradoxical. After banning the app in 2020 due to perceived threats to national security, he now appears to advocate for government ownership of a social media platform. This shift has drawn criticism and skepticism, especially since he is reportedly in direct discussions with Chinese President Xi Jinping, raising further questions about the implications of such a partnership between a government and a social media entity.
Disregarding Security Concerns Raised by Congress and the Supreme Court
In his comments, Trump dismissed the concerns that led to the bipartisan agreement on the TikTok ban, suggesting that the criticisms surrounding the app are unwarranted. He pointed out that various products manufactured in China do not receive the same scrutiny as TikTok, questioning why this specific app has become a focal point for national security concerns. His remarks reflect a controversial perspective that downplays the significance of data security, particularly regarding the younger demographic that predominantly uses the app.
The Legal Landscape Surrounding TikTok’s Future in the U.S.
Despite Trump’s recent executive orders, the legal ramifications of the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act (PAFACA) remain significant. Under the law, U.S. entities are prohibited from distributing or updating applications owned by TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance. The Attorney General is mandated to investigate any potential violations, which creates a complex legal landscape for tech companies navigating this evolving situation.
Implications of Trump’s Executive Order on Legal Enforcement
Trump’s executive order instructs the Attorney General to reassure providers that they will not face liability for actions taken during a specified timeframe. However, this order raises questions about the enforceability of PAFACA moving forward. Even if tech companies feel secure for the moment, the law’s five-year statute of limitations means that future administrations could impose substantial fines for violations, which complicates the operational landscape for businesses involved with TikTok.
The Divide Among Tech Companies and Their Future Actions
As the situation unfolds, tech companies appear to be divided in their responses. For instance, Oracle and Akamai, which provide technical support for TikTok, restored access before Trump’s order took effect. Meanwhile, TikTok remains inaccessible on major platforms like Apple and Google. Apple has stated that it must adhere to laws in the regions where it operates, which limits its ability to facilitate downloads or updates for TikTok.
The Dilemma for Tech Companies: Risking Fines or Abandoning Users?
Now, tech companies face a critical decision: should they risk incurring billions in fines by reinstating access to TikTok for its 170 million American users, the majority of whom are adults? This situation presents a challenging dilemma, as they weigh the potential legal repercussions against the interests of their user base.
Reflecting on Trump’s 2020 Predictions About TikTok
Ironically, Trump’s earlier assertions about TikTok serving as a potential tool for “blackmail” have taken on a different context in light of his recent actions. The implications of his statements raise questions about the broader issues of data privacy and security that the U.S. continues to grapple with, underscoring the complexities of the relationship between government, technology, and user privacy.
Liz Dye lives in Baltimore where she produces the Law and Chaos substack and podcast.
For more of the latest in litigation, regulation, deals and financial services trends, sign up for Finance Docket, a partnership between Breaking Media publications Above the Law and Dealbreaker.
