Tony Tan, a Google shareholder, has obtained and revealed a set of letters the Trump administration despatched to a number of tech firms, primarily saying: don’t fear concerning the legislation, the president has your again, hold TikTok on-line.
Nevertheless, Mr. Tan disagrees. And he’s taking authorized motion to show it.
A little bit of again story
The TikTok ban has had extra ups and downs than any busy individual would care to observe.
For immediately’s information, right here’s the half that issues: In direction of the tip of his time period, President Biden signed the “Defending People from Overseas Adversary Managed Purposes Act,” giving ByteDance till January 19, 2025, to divest TikTok’s U.S. operations or face a ban.
When President Trump took workplace on January 20, he signed an govt order halting the ban and increasing the deadline to April 5. Within the interim, the app had been down for a few days within the U.S., however entry was restored after Trump’s assurance to tech firms that his deadline extension was constitutional.
On April 4, Trump prolonged the deadline once more, this time to June 19. The subsequent day, his staff despatched letters to tech firms and repair suppliers, assuring them that underneath his order, they wouldn’t face authorized penalties for holding TikTok on-line, even when the precise legislation instructed them in any other case.
These are the letters Tan has now revealed, obtained by a Freedom of Info Act lawsuit. Certainly one of them was despatched to Apple, whereas related ones had been despatched to Google, Akamai, Amazon, Digital Realty Belief, Fastly, Microsoft, T-Cellular, Oracle, and LG:
Workplace of the Legal professional Normal
Washington, D.C. 20530April 5, 2025
Katherine Adams
Senior Vice President & Normal Counsel
Apple Inc.Ann O’Leary
Ian Gershengorn
Re: Enforcement of the Defending People from Overseas Adversary Managed Purposes Act
Pricey Ms. Adams:
Article II of america Structure vests within the President the accountability over nationwide safety and the conduct of overseas coverage. The President beforehand decided that an abrupt shutdown of the TikTok platform would intrude with the execution of the President’s constitutional duties to handle the nationwide safety and overseas affairs of america. See Govt Order 14166 (E.O. 14166). The Legal professional Normal has concluded that the Defending People from Overseas Adversary Managed Purposes Act (the “Act”) is correctly learn to not infringe upon such core Presidential nationwide safety and overseas affairs powers.
Govt Order 14166 instructed the Division of Justice to not take any motion on behalf of america to implement the Act for any conduct that occurred through the time frame from January 19, 2025 by April 5, 2025 (the “Coated Interval”). Pursuant to the President’s accountability to guard nationwide safety and to conduct overseas coverage, the President decided {that a} 75-day extension of the Coated Interval to June 19, 2025 is suitable and has signed a subsequent Govt Order to effectuate that willpower (the “Prolonged Coated Interval”). See Govt Order, Extending The TikTok Enforcement Delay (April 4, 2025).
Within the Govt Order signed on April 4, the President directed “the Legal professional Normal to situation a letter to every supplier stating that there was no violation of the statute and that there is no such thing as a legal responsibility for any conduct that occurred throughout” the Prolonged Coated Interval in addition to for any conduct from the efficient date of the Act. Based mostly on the Legal professional Normal’s overview of the info and circumstances, Apple Inc. has dedicated no violation of the Act and Apple Inc. has incurred no legal responsibility underneath the Act through the Coated Interval or the Prolonged Coated Interval. Apple Inc. could proceed to supply companies to TikTok as contemplated by these Govt Orders with out violating the Act, and with out incurring any authorized legal responsibility.
The Division of Justice can be irrevocably relinquishing any claims america might need had in opposition to Apple Inc. for the conduct proscribed within the Act through the Coated Interval and Prolonged Coated Interval, with respect to TikTok and the bigger household of ByteDance Ltd. and TikTok, Inc. purposes lined underneath the Act. That is derived from the Legal professional Normal’s plenary authority over all litigation, civil and legal, to which america, its companies, or departments, are events, in addition to the Legal professional Normal’s authority to enter settlements limiting the longer term train of govt department discretion.
Lastly, as a result of the Act vests authority for investigations and enforcement of the Act solely within the Legal professional Normal, the Division of Justice intends to take all obligatory actions to implement the President’s Govt Orders and guard the Legal professional Normal’s unique authority to implement the Act, to incorporate submitting amicus briefs, statements of curiosity, or intervening in litigation.
Regards,
Pamela Bondi
Legal professional Normal
United States Division of Justice
What Mr. Tan is saying
In an announcement offered to 9to5Mac, Mr. Tan says:
“The President’s purported ‘extensions’ of the TikTok ban don’t have any foundation within the legislation (…) Firms that break the legislation by persevering with to host TikTok are exposing their shareholders to ruinous authorized legal responsibility. Beneath federal legislation, each Trump and a future President have as much as 5 years to prosecute the businesses for violations.”
In different phrases, he’s nervous {that a} future court docket may rule the president didn’t have the authority to override the legislation, and that firms would possibly nonetheless be held responsible for violating it by persevering with to host TikTok.
In actual fact, he has sued Google’s mum or dad firm, Alphabet, searching for to analyze why it restored TikTok to the Play Retailer after Trump’s govt order. He believes the corporate’s resolution may open it as much as “a whole lot of billions of {dollars} in legal responsibility,” which might additionally have an effect on shareholders like himself.
He’s not alone in his concern. As reported by The New York Occasions:
“There are different issues which might be extra essential than TikTok in immediately’s world, however for pure refusal to implement the legislation as Article II requires, it’s simply breathtaking,” mentioned Alan Z. Rozenshtein, a College of Minnesota legislation professor who has written concerning the nonenforcement of the TikTok ban, referring to the a part of the Structure that claims presidents should take care that the legal guidelines be faithfully executed.
For now, what’s clear is that firms like Apple and Google had been requested to take the president at his phrase, and so they did. Whether or not these letters will truly provide lasting safety or simply short-term political cowl, will probably be a query for future courts.
Within the meantime, it seems like Mr. Tan will hold pushing from the sidelines, not simply to carry Google accountable, however to guarantee that shareholders like him received’t be left holding the bag if issues go south.
Apple Watch offers on Amazon
FTC: We use revenue incomes auto affiliate hyperlinks. Extra.
