The RESTRICT Act, heralded as the long-awaited “TikTok ban,” is an ineffective piece of legislation that fails to adequately protect Americans while drastically expanding government power and eroding digital freedom. An alternative is needed.
The bipartisan legislation backed by the Biden administration mentions neither TikTok nor its parent company, ByteDance, but does make clear that the federal government can disrupt “undue or unacceptable risk[s]” posed by technology “transactions” in which foreign adversaries (notably Red China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, and Venezuela) have an interest. Essentially, if any digital infrastructure used by unfriendly governments — or companies in service of these governments — poses an “undue or unacceptable risk,” the executive branch may “take such action as the President considers appropriate to compel divestment of, or otherwise mitigate the risk associated with [the entity].”
ByteDance is integrated with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) — there is no way around this fact. Key executives of the company are enthusiastic supporters of President Xi Jinping. Taking this into account, along with the well-documented national security risks posed by TikTok and its ability to strip-mine user data, it’s reasonable to conclude the RESTRICT Act would, well, restrict TikTok. But if it were to do so, it would do it slowly.
As it currently stands, the RESTRICT Act might result in action against TikTok but only after a drawn-out bureaucratic process in which unelected officials decide it could harm the U.S., six months after which a decision might be made to prohibit it, and the
