House approves anti-TikTok measure as part of foreign aid proposal
The House voted in favor of a bill banning TikTok or forcing its sale to a U.S. parent company within nine months, with a possible three-month extension.
A widespread ban on TikTok, including in Wisconsin, appears to be on the horizon unless the app's parent company, ByteDance, divests the platform.
This Friday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Washington Circuit decided to reject the request for review of three petitions filed by TikTok and ByteDance, the parent company. The court ruled that these petitions, which sought to overturn the impending ban, were unconstitutional.
Will TikTok be banned in Wisconsin?
In April, Congress passed and President Joe Biden signed a bill that will make TikTok illegal to download anywhere in the United States, including Wisconsin, starting January 19, 2025, unless ByteDance sells the platform to another company.
If ByteDance does not sell the application, it will no longer be possible to download TikTok from the Apple App Store or Google Play, nor to access the application via an American internet browser.
US users who already own the TikTok app will be able to continue using it, but will not have access to future software updates if TikTok disappears from app stores.
Why is TikTok considered a national security threat?
Proponents of banning TikTok are primarily concerned about the access of ByteDance, a Chinese company based in Beijing, to American user data. More than 170 million Americans use TikTok.
In particular, Democratic and Republican members of Congress have claimed that the Chinese government could potentially spy on Americans or spread propaganda through the app. The ban enjoyed broad bipartisan support, with the Senate voting 79-18 and the House 352-65.
Which Wisconsin politicians support banning TikTok?
Wisconsin's congressional delegation largely supported banning TikTok.
In fact, Wisconsin Rep. Mike Gallagher was one of the authors of the bill and is a strong advocate of banning the app.
-“We cannot risk having a dominant news platform in America controlled or owned by a company that is beholden to the Chinese Communist Party, our primary adversary,” Gallagher, a Green Bay Republican, said earlier This year.
Of eight members of Wisconsin's House delegation, only Democratic Reps. Mark Pocan and Gwen Moore voted against banning TikTok.
“There are probably valid concerns about misinformation on social media and everything else,” Pocan told the Journal Sentinel in March. “But to say that a single platform is the problem just because it's Chinese-owned, honestly, I think that borders more on xenophobia than addressing that root problem.”
How did TikTok react to the ban?
TikTok and ByteDance have regularly denied allegations that the app poses a threat to national security in the United States, according to USA TODAY.
When arguing against the law in federal appeals court earlier this year, TikTok's outside lawyer, Andrew Pincus, said banning TikTok would violate American users' free speech rights, USA reported TODAY.
“The law before this court is unprecedented, and its consequences would be enormous,” Pincus said. “For the first time in history, Congress expressly targeted an American speaker by banning his speech and the speech of 170 million Americans.”
What could the U.S. Supreme Court and President Donald Trump do?
Both companies said they would appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court. The court has not yet announced whether it will hear the case, according to the Associated Press.
It is also uncertain how the incoming administration of President-elect Donald Trump might change the situation. During his first term, Trump attempted to ban TikTok but claimed during his recent campaign that he was against a ban.
Original article written by: Lawrence Andrea.
The issue of banning TikTok raises significant concerns regarding national security and data protection. If one understands the motivations behind the current legislation, it is crucial to carefully consider the implications of such a ban on freedom of expression and access to information. In this debate, it is essential to favor a balanced approach, which takes into account user security while preserving fundamental democratic principles. Through this slow legislative evolution, it would be wise to initiate an inclusive dialogue which makes it possible not only to assess the risks linked to specific applications, but also to consider measures which could strengthen cybersecurity in general without resorting to draconian restrictions. Vigilance is essential in this constantly changing context, where technological and political issues increasingly overlap.
- --