Last week, members of the TechCongress team attended a panel discussion regarding the recent “Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act” (H.R.7521). The panel was hosted by Harvard University’s Institute for Rebooting Social Media (RSM), a three-year “pop-up” research initiative at the Berkman Klein Center that aims to address social media’s most urgent problems. The panel was moderated by RSM visiting scholar Anupam Chander and hosted speakers Jennifer Huddleston (Cato Institute), Ramya Krishnan (Knight First Amendment Institute), Jenna Leventoff (ACLU), & Alan Z. Rozenshtein (University of Minnesota).
The “Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act”, casually nicknamed “the TikTok bill”, has caught national attention after being passed by the House with a vote of 352-65. The Act seeks to protect the national security of the United States by limiting the distribution of applications controlled by foreign adversaries, and explicitly cites TikTok and any other services or applications developed or provided by ByteDance as an adversarial application.The bill is one of the latest initiatives set forth by U.S. government in an effort strengthen data privacy protections and regulate social media, coming months after a heated Senate hearing with social media CEOs and an array of new social media regulations.
As many focus their attention on the imminent ban of TikTok, the future implications of this bill have gone largely unnoticed. The bill would effectively prohibit the distribution, maintenance or provision of internet hosting services for a “foreign adversary controlled application.” Though the bill specifically categorizes TikTok and other ByteDance applications as a controlled application, it also enables the president to classify which foreign applications are prohibited, given their perceived threat to national security. Exceptions are made for applications that (a) execute a qualified divestiture from the adversarial party or (b) are primarily used to post product, business, or travel information and reviews.
Despite House passage and early support from President Joe Biden, the bill has sparked concerns amongst tech policy experts. A particular point of concern for panelists this past Friday were the potential implications of the bill with regards to the First Amendment. As some panelists expressed concerns about the bill giving the president significant power over which products/applications to permit within the U.S., others pointed out that the First Amendment is deeply unique, held faith in the existing checks and balances in the U.S. government, and argued that the bill was constitutionally compliant. Panelists also discussed the broader problem of underdeveloped data privacy legislation, which was sparked by panelist Ramya Krishnan proclaiming that “protecting Americans’ privacy is an interest of the highest order, but the way that you protect that interest is by passing comprehensive data privacy law, not a TikTok ban.” In response to Ramya’s statements, panelist Alan Rozenshetein stressed the importance of considering the scope of the bill, arguing that the bill did not have to address all existing problems of data privacy and that, as it stands, the bill does “pass constitutional muster.” The panel also discussed the significant disturbance a ban on TikTok would create, impacting content creators, kids that use social media to find community, and businesses. Regardless, all agreed that the app was not irreplaceable and could be replicated albeit with disruption.
This panel was just one of many insightful events hosted by the Berkman Klein Center, and opened up new insights and points for consideration amongst the audience. As the technology policy landscape evolves, it becomes increasingly crucial to examine legislation from a variety of viewpoints and explore its multifaceted dimensions.
To watch a recording of the panel, click here.