[mminer237]

The Bill of Rights does not inherently apply to non-citizens. There's nothing stopping the people from running TikTok without government oversight. The only problem is that a foreign adversary controls it. This really is not comparable to China's restrictions.

[ok123456]

Yes, it does Yamataya v. Fisher and Yick Wo v. Hopkins. And that protection extends to commercial entities: First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti.

[mminer237]

Certain aspects of it do, but it doesn't as a whole. See United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez for the precedent that the Fourth Amendment doesn't totally apply to non-citizens. The Supreme Court hasn't specifically ruled on the First Amendment, it's hard to imagine that they would say hostile nations have an inalienable right to publish as much propaganda as they want in the US.

[ok123456]

Even assuming that exception is taken up, it would be difficult to prove in a court that TikTok is using its editorial control to publish propaganda beyond what other social media platforms do quiescently.

Propaganda is what advertising is. Should the courts restrict companies from their ability to advertise?

[zeroonetwothree]

It's not a criminal trial. The US doesn't have to prove that TikTok did anything. They merely need to show a compelling interest in restricting its future actions.

[mistermann]

https://old.reddit.com/r/bjj/comments/qvecmj/sneakiness_and_...