Oddbean new post about | logout
▲ ▼
Yael | 7 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag +1 
 It does none of that. It's a bill to force a sale.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7521/text?s=1&r=1&q=%7B%22search%22%3A%22HR7521%22%7D
▲ ▼
Vance | 7 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 Have you read this? 
Section G3B reads to me as if it can apply to a website as I suggested, ie "covered company" which includes websites as per their definition controlled by a foreign adversary. What about what I said is incorrect?
▲ ▼
Yael | 7 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 that is a definitional clause to explain what the forced divestiture applies to. The bill mentions ByteDance and TikTok specifically, “covered company” is the legal nomenclature per the US code. Any attempt to go beyond TikTok would be a direct constitutional challenge
▲ ▼
Vance | 7 months ago (raw) | root | parent | reply | flag 
 Well the way its written it can apply to covered companies not related to Bytedance. Constitution gets broken all the time. Cases sometimes go to court for these breakages but by the time it's decided upon the damage is done.