Wednesday will witness the anticipated voting in the US House of Representatives regarding a proposed bill mandating Bytedance, the owner of TikTok, to either divest the application or confront a complete prohibition.
Spearheaded by a bipartisan coalition of nearly two dozen Republicans and Democrats, the bill titled the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act swiftly progressed after its introduction last week. Unanimously endorsed, it prohibits the nationwide distribution of apps overseen by companies hailing from adversarial nations—such as Bytedance situated in China. Should it become law, Bytedance would be compelled to divest TikTok to ensure its continued availability in the US.
In recent years, Congress has made attempts to ban TikTok, yet these efforts have faltered. However, the current bill represents the closest approach to materializing this intention. Nonetheless, the political landscape surrounding a potential ban remains uncertain. While legislation aimed at regulating domestic tech firms has largely stagnated, the prospect of a TikTok ban is advancing towards congressional consideration.
In January, President Joe Biden's reelection campaign made a notable move by joining TikTok, despite concerns about the app's purported national security risks. Nevertheless, Biden has expressed his willingness to sign the bill into law should it clear the Senate. Conversely, former President Donald Trump is actively urging lawmakers to oppose the bill, despite his administration's prior attempts to ban the app. Trump recently took to Truth Social to advocate against the bill, stating, "If you get rid of TikTok, Facebook and Zuckerschmuck will double their business. I don't want Facebook, who cheated in the last Election, doing better. They are a true Enemy of the People!"
In the previous year, TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew made a significant appearance before the House Energy and Commerce Committee, marking the company's inaugural presence on Capitol Hill. During the session, Chew faced rigorous questioning on various topics, notably encompassing child safety and the purported national security threats TikTok allegedly poses to American users. Following the hearing, Senator Mark Warner of Virginia introduced the RESTRICT Act, aiming to empower the Secretary of Commerce to prohibit foreign technologies and companies from operating in the US on national security grounds. However, backing for the bill dwindled due to constitutional apprehensions regarding the potentially excessive authority it would grant to the executive branch.
The prevailing House Republican bill endeavors to circumvent comparable constitutional challenges by instituting a mechanism enabling its regulations to encompass other foreign-controlled entities, notwithstanding its direct mention of Bytedance. Under this bill, companies would be afforded a 165-day window to divest their applications before facing removal from US app stores. In January, Chew testified for the second time alongside other prominent Big Tech CEOs, including Meta's Mark Zuckerberg, during a hearing focused on child safety.
In response to the bill, a TikTok spokesperson conveyed to WIRED, "This legislation is geared towards a preconceived result: the complete prohibition of TikTok in the United States. The government is endeavoring to deprive 170 million Americans of their constitutional right to free expression. Such action would not only harm numerous businesses, but also deprive artists of their audience and jeopardize the livelihoods of countless creators nationwide."
TikTok has consistently cited the First Amendment and the right to free speech in its defense against various attempts to ban the app. In April of last year, Montana legislators passed a bill aimed at removing TikTok from app stores within the state. TikTok responded by filing a lawsuit against the state, arguing that the law infringed upon free speech rights. In November, a federal judge ruled in favor of TikTok, thereby safeguarding the app from a state-level ban that was scheduled to take effect at the outset of this year.
Last week, TikTok issued push notifications to its millions of users in the US, advocating the same argument prior to the House's initial vote on the new bill. Within the app, the notification featured a single button prompting users to contact their representatives and urge them to vote "no" on the proposal. Politico reported that lawmakers' offices were inundated with calls from users opposing the bill, reflecting the significant impact of TikTok's mobilization efforts.
Should the bill receive approval in the House, it will progress to the Senate, where its fate remains uncertain. Senator Warner informed Reuters that he is carefully examining the bill but has yet to disclose his stance on it. Meanwhile, Republicans such as Lindsey Graham have purportedly expressed their reluctance to see the app vanish entirely.
Nevertheless, certain experts express concern that House Republicans may be overlooking the potential threats posed by US-based tech companies in their campaign against TikTok. Over the years, Congress has compelled these companies to testify regarding purported privacy and safety breaches. However, measures aimed at regulating these companies seldom advance to the floor for consideration.
Sacha Haworth, Executive Director of the Tech Oversight Project, expressed to WIRED on Tuesday, "If House Republicans were genuinely committed to addressing national security risks posed by Big Tech or tech platforms, they would be scrutinizing Google, Meta, Apple, and Amazon. However, they are not. This underscores the lack of seriousness behind this bill. It appears to be merely a symbolic gesture to give the impression of confronting Big Tech, likely to appeal to their base."