That's not quite correct, b/c the above only applies to companies other than TikTok/ByteDance, which are called out explicitly in the Act.

However, there is an open question as to whether Trump will choose to enforce the law.

▲

salawat 6 months ago | parent [-]

Surprised Supreme Court let that through. Passing laws directed at particular individuals is not kosher under the article 1 Section 9. Clause 3.

>No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

Then again, the bill is creating a framework to allow a President to essentially ignore that particular enjoinder and SCOTUS has already shown themselves willing to let a President run rampant.

	▲	mplanchard 6 months ago \| parent [-]
		As you might imagine, the decision, linked in the comments here, goes into detail about why that does not apply in this case (foreign company, so the protections of the constitution don’t apply, and national security interest)