Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
motorest | on: TikTok goes dark in the US
> It’s interesting that they didn’t press the constitutionality of this. They fought over “free speech” where it’s more clear that this might be a bill of attainder or violation of the 14th amendment.

Please explain in layman's terms why do you believe the 14th amendment applies to the federal government rejecting a corporation owned and controlled by a totalitarian regime from operating within the US.

withinboredom | parent
> No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

I believe this applies to the USA as a whole as well, not just to states (Bolling v. Sharpe (1954) according to ChatGPT). One could argue the law is unconstitutional because it applies a punishment without due process.

motorest | root | parent | next
> I believe this applies to the USA as a whole as well, not just to states (Bolling v. Sharpe (1954) according to ChatGPT). One could argue the law is unconstitutional because it applies a punishment without due process.

The 14th amendment applies to US citizens and persons. The law requires ByteDance to sell it's TikTok position. Who do you think is the US citizen or person in this case? China's CCP?

philwelch | root | parent | next
“Citizens of the United States” and “person within its jurisdiction” don’t apply to the Chinese Communist Party.
withinboredom | root | parent
Pretty sure it was a US company... probably owned by Chinese, but I haven't been following it super closely and can't see how that matters any bit. It's sad how much the US has changed in the last decade since I became an expat almost a decade ago.
motorest | root | parent
> Pretty sure it was a US company... probably owned by Chinese (...)

ByteDance Ltd. is a Chinese internet technology company headquartered in Haidian, Beijing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ByteDance

withinboredom | root | parent
I mean, literally right here in the first page of the arguments (page 4):

> First, TikTok incorporated as a U.S. company speaking in the United States.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcr...

motorest | root | parent
I think you're confused.

The company being targeted is ByteDance, not TikTok. The US government wants ByteDance to sell it's controlling position on TikTok to someone else, or else TikTok can no longer operate in the US. ByteDance is a Chinese company that is a de-facto shell corporation of China's CCP. For the 14th amendment to apply, you would need to argue that either a Chinese corporation or China's CCP would be US citizens.

whimsicalism | root | parent
wdym - they’re literally taking it to court right now