President Donald Trump has signed an executive order aimed at prolonging the operations of popular social media platform TikTok for another 75 days. This surprise move has delivered relief to the app's users amid rising national security questions surrounding its Chinese parent company, ByteDance.
While Trump's directive gives ByteDance additional time to explore options for selling the app to meet legal demands before it faces potential banning, it also raises compelling legal questions. "I guess I have a warm spot for TikTok," Trump noted, having amassed almost 15 million followers on the platform since he joined last year. His strong presence on the app has been attributed to helping him connect with younger voters, appealing to the 170 million U.S. users.
Access to TikTok was interrupted for more than 12 hours when Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the ban, set to take effect on Sunday. Fortunately for users, Trump's weekend announcement saw the platform restored as he prepared the executive order to pause the ban.
Despite users gaining access once more, the app has not returned to the download sections of Google and Apple app stores. Business leaders and lawmakers continue to watch closely as the Trump administration navigates through complex regulatory waters linked to the app's operations and ownership.
Concerns over TikTok's influence on American users persist, especially with its sophisticated algorithm creating personalized video feeds based on user behavior. These apprehensions began long before Trump’s presidency, continuing as Congress passed new laws citing national security risks associated with foreign tech companies.
The law enacted prior to Trump’s executive order specified fines of up to $5,000 for every U.S. user against major mobile app stores and hosting services if they retained the app beyond the mandated sale deadline. Trump's order effectively brings TikTok back online but also raises questions surrounding its legality. According to Sarah Kreps, director of Cornell University's Tech Policy Institute, "Executive orders cannot override existing laws," creating ambiguity about Trump's authority to extend the deadline retroactively.
Experts have expressed doubts about whether any progress toward the sale of TikTok could sufficiently demonstrate compliance with the laws passed by Congress. Alan Rozenshtein, law professor at the University of Minnesota, pointed out the president's potential discretion to define what constitutes “qualified divestiture” under new legal frameworks.
Sparking significant interest, Chinese officials have recently suggested they may ease restrictions on the sale of TikTok. On the same day of Trump's announcement, China’s vice president met with U.S. representatives, with the Chinese Foreign Ministry stating business transactions should adhere to market principles.
This shift hints at potential opportunities for moving past what had been perceived as crippling reticence from China about selling the app. Until now, it appeared China would not allow negotiations for TikTok, considering it part of their competitive stance against the U.S.
Interestingly, TikTok and ByteDance were among several topics discussed last Friday during a telephone conversation between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping.
How enforcement of the ban will play out remains uncertain. Trump may urge the Justice Department to ignore the law, but analysts suggest such actions could lead to legal challenges. With broad bipartisan support for the legislation passed by Congress, notable political figures are skeptical of Trump’s tactics for circumventing the law. "I think we will enforce the law," House Speaker Mike Johnson stated, marking the potential conflict between the legislative and executive branches.
Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas highlighted several agencies and private entities willing to seek legal action to uphold the ban. Notably, he mentioned the extensive liabilities companies could face under the law due to continued facilitation of TikTok.
Despite these complications, many large technology firms involved are less inclined to make extreme decisions swiftly, owing to feasibility studies on compliance against possible penalties. Gus Hurwitz from the International Center for Law and Economics pointed out the typical nature of civil penalties faced by tech companies.
Some companies are already caught at the crossroads, like Oracle, which freely operates TikTok’s cloud services. They hold some contracts with the U.S. government, complicate their decisions about maintaining partnerships with the app now under scrutiny.
Apple and Google have visibly paused new downloads for TikTok without commenting on their stance. Tags on their platform now read—they are obliged to abide by local laws, which the fluctuated directives around TikTok continue to muddy.
While Trump’s actions could signal stability for TikTok users, the legality around enforcement hangs thick with uncertainty as lawmakers question whether they will enforce what they put to law.