What's new

Welcome

If you already have an account, please login, but if you don't have one yet, you are more than welcome to freely join the community of lawyers around the world..

Register Log in
  • We don't have any responsibilities about the news being sent in this site. Legal News are automatically being collected from sources and submitted in this forum by feed readers. Source of each news is set in the news and a link to its source is always added.
    (Any News older than 21 days from its post time will be deleted automatically!)

Jurist House of Representatives approves bill to ban TikTok in US

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • Thread starter
  • Staff
  • #1

Dadparvar

Staff member
Nov 11, 2016
10,592
0
6
The House of Representatives on Wednesday approved a bill that could ban TikTok in the US.

If enacted, the bill would outlaw the distribution, maintenance, or updating of any app owned by or affiliated with the Beijing-based TikTok owner ByteDance, Ltd., or any successor or subsidiary if such is owned by “foreign adversaries” — an evolving list of countries and regimes determined by US authorities to have “engaged in a long-term pattern or serious instances of conduct significantly adverse to the national security of the United States or security and safety of United States persons,” as defined by the Federal Code of Regulations. Per the Code, the US’ current foreign adversaries include:

(1) The People’s Republic of China, including the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (China);
(2) Republic of Cuba (Cuba);


(3) Islamic Republic of Iran (Iran);


(4) Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea);


(5) Russian Federation (Russia); and
(6) Venezuelan politician Nicolás Maduro (Maduro Regime).
While the bill targets TikTok specifically, it also lays the framework to target other “foreign adversary controlled applications.” In this case, additional steps would be required, including public notice that the company with ownership or control of the app was being considered for the designation, and a public report to Congress detailing the specific security concerns. For the app could be banned under this legislation, the US president would then have to determine on these bases that the company indeed poses a national security threat.

The bill outlines exemptions for qualified divestitures and certain necessary services.

The vote earned substantial bipartisan support, with 197 Republicans and 155 Democrats voting in support, and 15 of the former and 50 of the latter voting against. There was vocal opposition among the lawmakers who voted against the bill. New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wrote via X:

I’m voting NO on the TikTok forced sale bill. This bill was incredibly rushed, from committee to vote in 4 days, with little explanation. There are serious antitrust and privacy questions here, and any national security concerns should be laid out to the public prior to a vote.
The legislation has also provoked the ire of advocacy groups devoted to free speech and expression, a coalition of which released a letter Tuesday urging House leaders to reject the bill, arguing:

It would violate the First Amendment rights of Americans across the country who rely on TikTok for information, communication, advocacy, and entertainment. This bill would functionally ban the distribution of TikTok in the United States, and would grant the President broad new powers to ban other social media platforms based on their country of origin.
TikTok last week appealed directly to users, urging them to call their representatives to vocalize opposition to the ban.





The post House of Representatives approves bill to ban TikTok in US appeared first on JURIST - News.

Continue reading...

Note: We don't have any responsibilities about this news. Its been posted here by Feed Reader and we had no controls and checking on it. And because News posted here will be deleted automatically after 21 days, threads are closed so that no one spend time to post and discuss here. You can always check the source and discuss in their site.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top