The thing that baffled me most was that nobody asked the very simple question: how is this supposed "foreign influence" an actual THREAT? "Threat" means something harmful. *Hearing words* isn't going to hurt anyone, even if these words are "anti-American" or whatever. We should have a much higher standard for what "threat" actually means.
I wanted someone, anyone, to break down exactly what was supposed to happen, and how China was supposedly going to harm Americans via a silly video app. Who's supposedly going to die? Who's going to get hurt? Such an obvious question, but nobody asked it.
"In other words, the Court is saying national security is above its pay grade. "
The Supreme Court doesn't strike down laws because they are stupid of bad, only if they are un-Constitutional. Or at least that's their supposed role.
The court said that Congress made a reasonable claim on national security, not necessarily an accurate one. They refused to consider secret evidence that TikTok's lawyers couldn't see. And they also noted that even TikTok's lawyers "do not dispute that the Government has an important and well-grounded interest in preventing China from collecting the personal data of tens of millions of U. S. TikTok users."
The question before the court is whether the law is Constitutional, not whether it's good policy. The court said it's constitutional because foreign corporations do not have free speech rights, and regulations of corporate ownership that have content-neutral impacts on speech have less protection under the First Amendment. They basically said 'this is Congress regulating a microphone, not what someone says into that microphone.'
And a reasonable articulation of national security interests is enough, just as any other state interest might be enough. The alternative is to create a Constitutional prohibition against regulating most tech firms or foreign speech in U.S. elections.
The Supreme Court is not supposed to make policy, it's supposed to determine what the law is. Blame Congress for a law you don't like, don't demand the court further extend the Citizens United-style caselaw.
TikTok users, who do understand what is going on, should use the 90 days wisely, and inform their fellow users. No one who uses it should come away not knowing. And, how about that Little Red Book making a resurgence, not the one the 1960s group "Love" sang about, but the Chinese one a whole lot of Americans are now downloading, AKA Red Note.
Joy I was shocked - I saw so many people to use TikTok and didn't know that this was going to happen didn't even know that there was going to be a ban. I'm still shocked by how could you log into that app so regularly and not know that? deeply disheartening.
National security. It isn't hard to imagine the impact of our killing 50,000 Palestinians last year with unlimited support of Israel. A few people in the US and overseas might be a little irritated at that and want to do something violent in return. But that is of no concern?
We should not be spied on by our own government but given that we are, is the national security state keeping tabs on all Americans who support Israel? Ethnic cleansing is not compatible with liberty and justice for all, as much a rejection of what we value as was communism that raised so much fear in the 20th century. Communists never managed to get our government to do their bidding. Zionists have done so and in front of our eyes! We assisted in slaughter for a tiny state with 1/40th our population. Outrage? No, hardly a whimper.
AIPAC boasts of the people it installs in Congress, working as it does for a foreign country. That is of no concern for national security, though it is blatant evidence of foreign influence on our very legislature? Chuck Schumer, that you mentioned, boasts that his name means "defender of Israel". This guy at the top of our government? Rahm Emmanuel, ex mayor of Chicago and advisor to Clinton a former member of the IDF, so we can assume he is all-in for Israel, supposedly wants to be an Illinois senator!. And Old Joe a declared Zionist.
Some who read comments here may think I emphasize Israel too much. That is an impossibility. This site by Ken is all about truth-telling. Zionism is THE threat to our country, with its rejection of liberty and justice for all, so powerful that it has made Americans forget that phrase. Is anyone not on auto-pilot? I want my country back. A member of the synagogue before which I stand vigil came out to tell me that I had better be gone now that a ceasefire is to take effect (this yelled as he walked away after passing silently; those who dislike my message don't have the courage to simply talk to me, because Zionism has no defense).
Far from leaving the sidewalk, I am in for the long haul, I have only begun to stand for my country and call out Zionism for the anti-American philosophy that it is. The Gaza slaughter of 2024-5 will stand high in the atrocities of history, Gov. Shapiro of PA and Nikki Haley signing the bombs we provided! I may not be able to wake up timid Americans who tremble at the thought that they will wrongly be called anti-semites for being anti-Zionist, but I am sure going to try.
The silence of the American citizenry is shameful, a slap in the face to all those courageous Americans who gave us our rights that so few even bother to use, primarily freedom of speech. The valiant members of Jewish Voice for Peace are a notable exception, but where are the non-Jews like me?
I am amazed at the number of people who said, “Who cares if the government bans something I don’t even use?” Even worse, “If the government says it’s a national security threat, it must be one.” When I pointed out that the same government that banned TikTok will continue to *use* TikTok [thanks for that info, Ken], I was told that - hold on - the government is smarter than the typical user. Or in response to how they’d feel if the government banned Facebook, “That would never happen because too many people use it.”
Critical thinking is a dying art in this country. I suspect that a majority of Americans will meekly surrender their rights every time they hear, “It’s NATIONAL SECURITY!!!!” And when their candidate of choice loses an election, it’s ELECTION INTERFERENCE by [foreign villain in vogue].
The Marc Andreessen interview in the New York Times was an interesting read. His observation that the Biden administration viewed social media itself as a political threat seems on point.
There's was an awful lot of butthurt when it sold to its current owner. They have been playing this angle for some time to try and get it back. Zuck in particular.
You're absolutely right that anyone who couldn't see this coming has no business being in politics. I'm not a genius or a psychic - but I've been calling this for weeks. The president of the United States should not have gone to bed Saturday without seeing this coming and preventing it (not least of all trying to prevent it months ago or, ya know, not signing that bill into law). This was an entirely foreseeable an entirely preventable disaster that has now ballooned into a tool that Donald Trump will use along with X and Facebook and Instagram to suppress the American people and their voices, and drive youth turnout for his third term or the term of his successor if he allows that to happen. And I don't want to hear about how you can't have a third term - the constitution is deeply irrelevant now and will not save us. Relying on a 250-year-old document to save us from Donald Trump is how we got into this mess to begin with. Be safe and take care everyone, tomorrow is about ready to be a disaster.
The thing that baffled me most was that nobody asked the very simple question: how is this supposed "foreign influence" an actual THREAT? "Threat" means something harmful. *Hearing words* isn't going to hurt anyone, even if these words are "anti-American" or whatever. We should have a much higher standard for what "threat" actually means.
I wanted someone, anyone, to break down exactly what was supposed to happen, and how China was supposedly going to harm Americans via a silly video app. Who's supposedly going to die? Who's going to get hurt? Such an obvious question, but nobody asked it.
This whole thing is so dumb.
"In other words, the Court is saying national security is above its pay grade. "
The Supreme Court doesn't strike down laws because they are stupid of bad, only if they are un-Constitutional. Or at least that's their supposed role.
The court said that Congress made a reasonable claim on national security, not necessarily an accurate one. They refused to consider secret evidence that TikTok's lawyers couldn't see. And they also noted that even TikTok's lawyers "do not dispute that the Government has an important and well-grounded interest in preventing China from collecting the personal data of tens of millions of U. S. TikTok users."
The question before the court is whether the law is Constitutional, not whether it's good policy. The court said it's constitutional because foreign corporations do not have free speech rights, and regulations of corporate ownership that have content-neutral impacts on speech have less protection under the First Amendment. They basically said 'this is Congress regulating a microphone, not what someone says into that microphone.'
And a reasonable articulation of national security interests is enough, just as any other state interest might be enough. The alternative is to create a Constitutional prohibition against regulating most tech firms or foreign speech in U.S. elections.
The Supreme Court is not supposed to make policy, it's supposed to determine what the law is. Blame Congress for a law you don't like, don't demand the court further extend the Citizens United-style caselaw.
TikTok users, who do understand what is going on, should use the 90 days wisely, and inform their fellow users. No one who uses it should come away not knowing. And, how about that Little Red Book making a resurgence, not the one the 1960s group "Love" sang about, but the Chinese one a whole lot of Americans are now downloading, AKA Red Note.
Joy I was shocked - I saw so many people to use TikTok and didn't know that this was going to happen didn't even know that there was going to be a ban. I'm still shocked by how could you log into that app so regularly and not know that? deeply disheartening.
Klip - follow the money, man. And no one does it as well as you. My guess is one of the tech companies purchases it for a low price. America!
Yep. Nothing like the money trail--and documented
https://x.com/5149jamesli/status/1880888299080098163?s=46&t=nPcszeJVnlq8XTWcFgxsHg
Looks like more to the story than China…
National security. It isn't hard to imagine the impact of our killing 50,000 Palestinians last year with unlimited support of Israel. A few people in the US and overseas might be a little irritated at that and want to do something violent in return. But that is of no concern?
We should not be spied on by our own government but given that we are, is the national security state keeping tabs on all Americans who support Israel? Ethnic cleansing is not compatible with liberty and justice for all, as much a rejection of what we value as was communism that raised so much fear in the 20th century. Communists never managed to get our government to do their bidding. Zionists have done so and in front of our eyes! We assisted in slaughter for a tiny state with 1/40th our population. Outrage? No, hardly a whimper.
AIPAC boasts of the people it installs in Congress, working as it does for a foreign country. That is of no concern for national security, though it is blatant evidence of foreign influence on our very legislature? Chuck Schumer, that you mentioned, boasts that his name means "defender of Israel". This guy at the top of our government? Rahm Emmanuel, ex mayor of Chicago and advisor to Clinton a former member of the IDF, so we can assume he is all-in for Israel, supposedly wants to be an Illinois senator!. And Old Joe a declared Zionist.
Some who read comments here may think I emphasize Israel too much. That is an impossibility. This site by Ken is all about truth-telling. Zionism is THE threat to our country, with its rejection of liberty and justice for all, so powerful that it has made Americans forget that phrase. Is anyone not on auto-pilot? I want my country back. A member of the synagogue before which I stand vigil came out to tell me that I had better be gone now that a ceasefire is to take effect (this yelled as he walked away after passing silently; those who dislike my message don't have the courage to simply talk to me, because Zionism has no defense).
Far from leaving the sidewalk, I am in for the long haul, I have only begun to stand for my country and call out Zionism for the anti-American philosophy that it is. The Gaza slaughter of 2024-5 will stand high in the atrocities of history, Gov. Shapiro of PA and Nikki Haley signing the bombs we provided! I may not be able to wake up timid Americans who tremble at the thought that they will wrongly be called anti-semites for being anti-Zionist, but I am sure going to try.
The silence of the American citizenry is shameful, a slap in the face to all those courageous Americans who gave us our rights that so few even bother to use, primarily freedom of speech. The valiant members of Jewish Voice for Peace are a notable exception, but where are the non-Jews like me?
I am amazed at the number of people who said, “Who cares if the government bans something I don’t even use?” Even worse, “If the government says it’s a national security threat, it must be one.” When I pointed out that the same government that banned TikTok will continue to *use* TikTok [thanks for that info, Ken], I was told that - hold on - the government is smarter than the typical user. Or in response to how they’d feel if the government banned Facebook, “That would never happen because too many people use it.”
Critical thinking is a dying art in this country. I suspect that a majority of Americans will meekly surrender their rights every time they hear, “It’s NATIONAL SECURITY!!!!” And when their candidate of choice loses an election, it’s ELECTION INTERFERENCE by [foreign villain in vogue].
I just can’t anymore.
The Marc Andreessen interview in the New York Times was an interesting read. His observation that the Biden administration viewed social media itself as a political threat seems on point.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/17/opinion/marc-andreessen-trump-silicon-valley.html
Is it legal for a president to "defer" a passed law?
AOC did say that the evidence presented to congress on the national security threat was not compelling
There's was an awful lot of butthurt when it sold to its current owner. They have been playing this angle for some time to try and get it back. Zuck in particular.
Well that turned out to be much ado about nothing.
You're absolutely right that anyone who couldn't see this coming has no business being in politics. I'm not a genius or a psychic - but I've been calling this for weeks. The president of the United States should not have gone to bed Saturday without seeing this coming and preventing it (not least of all trying to prevent it months ago or, ya know, not signing that bill into law). This was an entirely foreseeable an entirely preventable disaster that has now ballooned into a tool that Donald Trump will use along with X and Facebook and Instagram to suppress the American people and their voices, and drive youth turnout for his third term or the term of his successor if he allows that to happen. And I don't want to hear about how you can't have a third term - the constitution is deeply irrelevant now and will not save us. Relying on a 250-year-old document to save us from Donald Trump is how we got into this mess to begin with. Be safe and take care everyone, tomorrow is about ready to be a disaster.