It’s back!
This is a perfect way to use TikTok. It’s from inside one of the helicopters at the flyover before the Chiefs game yesterday. Freaking amazing.
Weird. The direct link does not work, but it did post in my Facebook. I saved it so let’s see if it works uploading. No.
My money is on Elmo.
There are several requirements that need to be met, in order to grant the extension, which is on page 62 (section a3):
The third one — that the legal agreements must already be in place — seems problematic here. Trump’s tweet expressing support for a 50/50 deal should not suffice for a legal agreement.
But, if his EO certifies that the three requirements have been met, it’s not clear that a court would reject that. It’s not certain who has standing to object to the extension. And, if the potential buyer is the US itself, then the President’s certification carries more weight than if the buyer was a private party. He can speak to what the US intends to do more authoritatively than he could with respect to the intentions of some private party.
That could create a First Amendment field day. Imagine if every content-based decision by TikTok were subject to FA scrutiny.
The zombification algorithm does have its uses.
I’m not in favor of a nanny state, but if we’ve identified smoking as a public health threat, I’m not sure how TikTok is exempt.
Ugh. I will acknowledge you appear to have been correct. I hate everything about it, can’t see a good outcome for the rule of law, and can only roll my eyes at the fact that absolute mayhem has been unleashed before the inauguration has even happened. But props, I should have booked it.
See my prior post. I fear on days like this some people are just more adept in this nothing matters anyway world than I am.
I momentarily forgot how little I care. I remember now.
Service is being restored…
“In agreement with our service providers, TikTok is in the process of restoring service. We thank President Trump for providing the necessary clarity and assurance to our service providers that they will face no penalties providing TikTok to over 170 million Americans and allowing over 7 million small businesses to thrive.”
Right.
This doesn’t make me happy either. Your presidency has become a joke. Trump will do anything for the highest bidder.
It’s a sad day.
So if there is a law banning Tiktok, they are just gambling on Trump or the SC overturning the law, which I think the latter already ruled on?
Or the law remains on the books, but conveniently ignored.
Or ByteDance agrees to share partial ownership with a US buyer which will have a money trail back to Trump/friends.
Sounds like Russia.
Does that put Executive Immunity back in play? On the books not inforced?
As a practical matter, yes, the executive branch would have immunity if they chose not to enforce this law. As an analogy, it is against the law to drive one mph over the speed limit. Your local police department almost certainly does not enforce that. And, if you tried to have them arrested for failing to enforce that law, you’d lose. They have discretion not to enforce such one-mph violations. If you want that law enforced your real remedy is through the political process — elect a mayor who will have the police department enforce that law.
There is a difference between overturning a law and failing to enforce the law. The consequences may be the same — the violation of the law goes unpunished. The SC held that the ban on TikTok is constitutional. Failing to enforce the law does not overturn the law or the SC decision. Though it means they have no current consequence. The law would still be on the books and potentially enforceable, if some (future) administration chooses to enforce it.
Would Tiktok potentially pay some heavy price for ignoring the law?
