The Washington Post | The Washington Post | Getty Images
President-elect Donald Trump During his first term, he warned early on about the national security threat posed by TikTok, and his rhetoric and policy discussions incorporated the social media app into his aggressive anti-China stance. But during the 2024 campaign, Trump appears to have a big turn.
In March last year, Trump said in an interview with CNBC’s “Squawk Box” that banning TikTok would make young people “crazy” and would also benefit. meta platform‘ Facebook.
Trump said: “TikTok has a lot of good things and a lot of bad things.” “But what I don’t like is that without TikTok, you can make Facebook bigger. I think Facebook is the enemy of the people and the enemy of a lot of the media. “
Trump’s transition team No specific comments on TikTok yetBut he said the election results gave the president a mandate to fulfill promises made during the campaign and that there were some important deadlines tied to TikTok’s fate.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is expected to rule on Trump’s challenge by Friday, ahead of Trump’s inauguration new law TikTok’s Chinese parent company ByteDance is required to divest its U.S. operations by January 19. Constitutional Issues Concerning Free Speechand the future of U.S. foreign-funded technology platforms
Courts generally defer to the views of the executive and legislative branches on national security matters, but the outcome may depend on whether the court views the issue solely as a national security issue or whether it also considers First Amendment concerns. Given that Congress has clear constitutional authority to regulate foreign commerce, the balance may favor the administration, which supports legislation requiring ByteDance to divest. Regardless, the case is likely to go to the Supreme Court.
As of now, Trump is set to be sworn in on January 20, the day after the federal ban on TikTok is scheduled to begin, and his comments have heightened concerns about the influence of major donors in Trump’s second administration. deep concern about its impact. In fact, this may be the first big decision Trump has made, and it tells us a lot about how far his administration is willing to go in prioritizing his donor wish list.
At the center of this debate is the Jeff Yass, major Republican donor There are significant financial ties to TikTok parent company ByteDance. Yass donated more than $46 million to Republican causes during the 2024 election cycle, Reported meeting with Trump in March, although the details of their conversation remain unclear. What is clear, however, is that Yas’s ownership in ByteDance has raised concerns in Washington whether Trump’s shift was influenced by donor priorities rather than purely out of concerns about market competition.
wall street journal recent reports The TikTok CEO has been personally lobbying Elon Musk on behalf of the company, who is now close to the president-elect. Meanwhile, Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg Dinner with Trump Last week at Mar-a-Lago.
The results of the TikTok ban reversal are troubling. Imagine the backlash if a prominent Democratic donor like George Soros, often vilified by Republicans, similarly positioned himself to influence major policy decisions related to personal financial interests. The accusations of corruption and undue influence would be deafening, if not worse. However, figures like Yass and especially Elon Musk – himself and his entangled financial interests with the Trump transition team and its many personnel and policy decisions – have been largely immune to the demands that have been made against him. Ross raises a review by critics of conspiracy theories.
This selective outrage highlights a systemic problem: a political system in which major donors have significant influence over policymaking, often without bipartisan efforts to express concerns or take action to enforce transparency or accountability.
TikTok’s Weaponized Influence
Concerns about donor influence are amplified when considering the risks associated with TikTok itself. The app’s meteoric rise has sparked bipartisan concerns about its relationship with the Chinese government. Lawmakers and intelligence officials have long warned of its potential for data collection, espionage and propaganda. These concerns are not abstract. During Congress’s last push to ban TikTok, the app demonstrated its ability to weaponize its platform by quickly mobilizing its user base to send calls and emails to lawmakers opposing the ban.
TikTok instantly demonstrated its ability to influence public sentiment, amplify social narratives and put pressure on lawmakers, underscoring its unparalleled ability as a tool to shape public policy and national opinion. Coupled with ByteDance’s ties to the Chinese government, the potential for TikTok to be misused or used for mischief is alarming.
Another concern surrounding the reversal of the TikTok ban is that there is already a law targeting TikTok: the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act (PAFACA), which was enacted in April 2024 as Section 118-50 part of Public Law No. The bipartisan legislation stipulates that apps controlled by foreign adversaries, such as TikTok, must be divested or face a U.S. ban. As a federal law, PAFACA cannot be overturned simply by presidential decree. The President of the United States cannot legally bypass Congress to repeal or overturn existing laws. Laws passed by Congress remain binding until repealed or modified by Congress or struck down by the courts.
Any changes to TikTok’s status should be addressed through the framework provided by PAFACA, rather than bypassing Congress or undermining existing laws. This transparent process will ensure that decisions are made publicly and in the public interest, rather than behind the scenes at Mar-a-Lago. Since Republicans control both the House and Senate during the newly elected Congress, they have the power to amend or repeal PAFACA. However, doing so would require going through a highly complex legislative process, which will inevitably bring more scrutiny to Yass.
Trump’s choice
Given Trump’s dominance of the highest federal courts, he could use this avenue, but without the courts, the president’s power in this regard is limited. The way the system works, any effort by Trump as president to unilaterally overturn the TikTok ban would be difficult to enforce.
The two options Trump has are executive discretion and executive order. The president has considerable discretion in how to enforce federal laws. For example, an administrative agency may prioritize certain aspects of the law, effectively reducing enforcement in specific areas. While executive orders cannot override existing laws, they can direct the executive branch on how to implement those laws, which may narrow their scope. Historically, presidents have used law enforcement discretion to achieve policy goals without overtly violating the law.
But addressing the TikTok issue through the existing legal framework already established by PAFACA will allow for the consideration of balanced alternatives, such as requiring stricter data security measures, local data storage or spinning off TikTok’s operations to US ownership. These options protect user access to applications while addressing legitimate security risks.
Many of these alternatives have already been explored in public discussions and through proposals such as the “Texas Plan,” and some have already made their way into law. They have also been criticized and challenged, largely because of insufficient follow-up or the perception that the efforts were incomplete, would never gain the approval of the Chinese government, or were simply incomplete or insufficient to address security concerns. But consideration of these remedies – which to date have not been implemented – should continue rather than the proposal being a complete failure.
The wider impact of donor-driven policies
Trump got one thing right with his comments about TikTok in March. It’s important to acknowledge that TikTok’s immense popularity creates another unique dilemma. With more than 150 million users in the United States, the app is more than just an entertainment platform, it has become a critical tool for creativity, connection, and commerce, especially for young Americans and small businesses. This widespread use complicates the conversation, as any decisions about TikTok’s future will inevitably impact the millions of people who rely on it for various purposes.
However, the app’s popularity should not outweigh the national security concerns it poses, especially given its ties to the Chinese government. ByteDance’s well-documented ties to the Chinese government have heightened concerns in Washington that TikTok’s data-gathering capabilities could be abused. These risks are not speculative—they reflect patterns of behavior consistent with Chinese state-sponsored cyber activity. Allowing donor-driven priorities to override these legitimate security concerns undermines public trust in decision-making processes and erodes confidence in government institutions.
The situation raises a key question: What other national priorities might be sacrificed to appease powerful donors? If decisions about TikTok, an app that has raised bipartisan concerns about its national security implications, could be affected, what would that mean for other pressing issues like energy policy, defense or trade? The stakes are too high to allow financial interests to determine public policy outcomes.
Americans deserve a government that treats national security as a top priority, not one that is negotiable or secondary to the interests of private wealthy donors.
-go through Dudrick McNeilManaging Director and Senior Policy Analyst at Longview Global, a CNBC contributor, and former Asia policy expert at the Department of Defense during the Obama administration.
