Is TikTok Facing a Ban in America Soon?

House lawmakers are moving quickly to potentially ban TikTok from the United States. In just two days this week, a crucial House committee put forth and passed a bill specifically aimed at TikTok. The entire House is scheduled to vote on it as soon as next week, with the White House indicating that President Joe Biden is ready to sign it.

The question on everyone's mind now is: could a TikTok ban actually come to fruition? And what sets apart this particular proposal from previous attempts by policymakers to restrict the popular video-sharing app utilized by 170 million Americans?

Here’s everything you need to know about the hot-button legislation.

What would the bill do?

If the bill passes, TikTok will have around five months to break ties with its Chinese parent company, ByteDance. If they fail to do so, app stores in the United States will not be allowed to offer the TikTok app for download on their platforms.

A man walks past the headquarters of ByteDance, the parent company of video sharing app TikTok, in Beijing.

A man walks past the headquarters of ByteDance, the parent company of video sharing app TikTok, in Beijing.

Greg Baker/AFP/Getty Images

The bill also includes restrictions for apps allegedly controlled by foreign adversaries like China, Iran, Russia, or North Korea. It also outlines a process for President Biden or any future president to identify apps that should be banned under the law.

If app stores break the rules, they could face fines based on the number of users of a banned app. The legislation sets fines at $5,000 per user of a banned app. This means that Apple and Google could potentially face fines of up to $850 billion each for TikTok.

The House Energy and Commerce Committee voted unanimously to advance the bill on Thursday.

What is TikTok saying?

TikTok is denouncing the legislation as a threat to the First Amendment rights of its users. They have initiated a campaign within the app encouraging users to contact their representatives in Washington to voice their opposition to the bill. Numerous congressional offices have reported being inundated with calls.

In a statement, TikTok expressed concerns about the government's efforts to undermine the free speech rights of 170 million Americans. They warned that this move could harm businesses, deprive artists of their audience, and negatively impact the livelihoods of many creators nationwide.

Lawmakers are taking action against TikTok because they believe it could be a threat to national security. They are concerned that the Chinese government might use its laws to access data from US TikTok users through ByteDance. This information could potentially be used to target intelligence operations or spread misinformation and propaganda.

The US government has not provided any proof that China has accessed TikTok user data. Cybersecurity experts consider this a possible but concerning situation.

Have you heard about President Donald Trump's previous attempts to address this issue? What is his current stance on the matter?

Yes. During his time in office, Trump utilized executive orders in an attempt to pressure ByteDance into selling TikTok and to prevent app stores from hosting the platform. Although these efforts faced legal challenges and stalled, Trump significantly contributed to making TikTok a prominent issue by connecting it to a broader anti-China agenda that involved a trade war and incendiary language causing concerns of anti-Asian hate.

Interestingly, Trump recently expressed opposition to a TikTok ban, stating on Truth Social that such a ban would only benefit Facebook and Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, whom he labeled as "a true Enemy of the People!"

It's unclear why Trump suddenly changed his mind about TikTok. Trump, the expected Republican candidate for president, is set to face Biden in the upcoming November election.

So, what sets this occasion apart?

First, it's important to note that we're discussing congressional legislation, not executive action. This bill aims to give the president clear authority to ban a foreign-owned social media app, unlike the previous debate during the Trump administration.

Second, when Trump tried to ban TikTok, he faced First Amendment objections. The lawmakers behind the new bill have addressed these concerns to ensure that the legislation is constitutionally sound.

Wisconsin Republican Rep. Mike Gallagher, a key supporter of the bill, clarifies that the proposed legislation does not outright ban TikTok. Instead, it gives TikTok the option to divest, with the potential consequence of a ban if it chooses not to comply. Gallagher mentions that he and his colleagues have been diligently crafting the bill for the past six months, seeking guidance from various officials in Washington, including the White House, to ensure its legal viability.

Additionally, it is worth noting that White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre has publicly expressed the administration's backing of the bill.

"We welcome the progress on this bill," she said to reporters. "We have been collaborating with lawmakers on it and hope to see it successfully passed and sent to the President for approval. But can it actually pass?"

The bill is moving quickly through the House, indicating that House leaders are confident it will pass with enough votes.

The real question is whether the bill will succeed in the Senate. If it reaches the Senate, it would probably go to the Senate Commerce Committee. Currently, there is no similar bill in the Senate, and Senator Maria Cantwell, who leads the Commerce Committee, has not fully committed to the bill, recognizing the concerns of those who oppose it.

Cantwell stated that she will be discussing with her Senate and House colleagues to find a way forward that upholds the constitution and safeguards civil liberties. She also questioned whether the bill infringes on the First Amendment.

Civil society groups believe that while the bill may not explicitly censor TikTok or its users, it will ultimately have that impact.

Jenna Leventoff, senior policy counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union, stated, "There's no denying that it would do just that. We strongly urge legislators to vote against this unconstitutional bill."

The bill's main tactic is to present TikTok with a choice that could result in a ban. However, First Amendment experts believe that this approach is deceptive and will not fool the courts.

According to Ken White, a First Amendment lawyer at Brown White & Osborn, courts consider whether a law's true impact is to suppress speech, not just its literal wording. While lawmakers argue that the bill is about regulating TikTok's foreign ownership, White points out that claiming "foreign influence" does not justify infringing on First Amendment rights. It remains uncertain whether Congress's attempt to use this excuse will be successful.

Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, highlighted the importance of considering a "less restrictive alternative" to a complete ban when assessing First Amendment issues. He suggested that enacting a national privacy law that governs how all companies manage American data, not just TikTok, could achieve the same goal without infringing on free speech rights.

In addition, it has been established by courts that Americans have the constitutional right to access foreign propaganda, regardless of the government's disapproval.

Jaffer stated that according to that example, banning TikTok would be considered unconstitutional even if it was clearly promoting the agenda of the Chinese government.

He added that allowing the government to limit access to propaganda would also give them the authority to restrict access to anything they label as propaganda.

Editor's P/S:

The potential ban on TikTok in the United States raises significant concerns regarding freedom of speech and privacy. While policymakers express apprehensions about national security risks posed by the Chinese-owned app, the proposed legislation treads a fine line between safeguarding national interests and infringing on the First Amendment rights of American citizens. The government's lack of concrete evidence supporting data access by China further complicates the issue.

It is crucial for lawmakers to carefully consider alternative measures that effectively address potential security concerns without resorting to a complete ban. Regulating data management practices and enacting privacy laws applicable to all companies could achieve the intended goals without impinging on free speech rights. Additionally, the government must respect the constitutional right of Americans to access foreign propaganda, even if it contradicts the government's stance. Striking a balance between national security and individual liberties requires a nuanced approach that prioritizes both aspects.