RESTRICT Act

Last updated

RESTRICT Act
Great Seal of the United States (obverse).svg
Other short titlesRestricting the Emergence of Security Threats that Risk Information and Communications Technology Act of 2023
Long titleTo authorize the Secretary of Commerce to review and prohibit certain transactions between persons in the United States and foreign adversaries, and for other purposes.
Announced inthe 118th United States Congress
Sponsored by Mark Warner (D–VA)
Number of co-sponsors25
Codification
Agencies affected
Legislative history

The RESTRICT Act (S. 686) is a proposed law that was first introduced in the United States Senate on March 7, 2023.

Contents

Introduced by Senator Mark Warner, the Act proposed that the Secretary of Commerce be given the power to review business transactions involving certain information and communications technologies products or services when they are connected to a "foreign adversary" of the United States, and pose an "undue and unacceptable risk" to the national security of the United States or its citizens.

Overview

The RESTRICT Act is described as "a systematic framework for addressing technology-based threats to the security and safety of Americans." [1] [2] It grants the Secretary of Commerce the authority to review transactions by certain foreign entities who offer "information and communications technologies products or services" (ICTS), in order to identify, investigate, and mitigate "undue and unacceptable" risks to the national security of the United States or its citizens. This includes but is not limited to: [3]

The Act applies to ICTS entities that are held in whole or in part by, or otherwise fall under the jurisdiction of a country or government that is designated under the Act as a "foreign adversary" of the United States, and has more than one million active users or units sold in the United States. [1] [2] The initial text of the Act classifies China (including Hong Kong and Macau), Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Russia, and the Nicolás Maduro regime of Venezuela as foreign adversaries. [3]

It would be unlawful for any person to violate any order or mitigation measure issued under the RESTRICT Act, with civil penalties of up to $250,000 or twice the value of the transaction that served as the basis of the order, whichever is greater, and criminal penalties of up to $1 million and up to 20 years imprisonment. [4] [3]

Reception

While the service was not mentioned by name by the bill or its sponsors, the RESTRICT Act was characterized as a means to potentially restrict or prohibit the Chinese-owned video sharing service TikTok from conducting business in the United States. [1] [2] [5] [4]

The bill has faced bipartisan criticism for having a lack of judicial oversight and transparency in its enforcement mechanisms, [6] and for containing wording broad and vague enough to potentially cover end-users (such as, for example, potentially criminalizing use of a VPN service or sideloading to access services blocked from doing business in the United States under the Act, due to the text stating that no person may "cause or aid, abet, counsel, command, induce, procure, permit, or approve the doing of any act" that violates orders issued under the Act). [5] [4] Many individuals have compared the bill to the Patriot Act. [6] [7]

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) expressed their opposition, arguing that the blocking of entire services violates the First Amendment rights of citizens. [6] [7] In regards to its implied target, Congressman Jamaal Bowman and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) believed that the federal government should prioritize internet privacy legislation that also applies to U.S.-based companies. [6]

Republican U.S. Senators J. D. Vance, Josh Hawley, and Rand Paul have all expressed their opposition, with Paul considering it contradictory for Republicans to advocate "censor[ing] social media apps that they worry are influenced by the Chinese" while at the same time being opposed to censorship. [6] Vance and Hawley both noted that while they support a ban on TikTok, they felt the RESTRICT Act possessed too many negative implications. [6] [7] Several Democratic officeholders, including Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, also criticized the legislation, with Ocasio-Cortez believing that it was being rushed, and citing that Congress had never received any classified national security briefings related to TikTok. [6] Libertarian groups including the Mises Caucus and Reason Foundation condemned the bill, with the former arguing that it "gives the government authority over all forms of communication domestic or abroad." [6] [7]

Warner's office stated that the bill was intended to target corporate entities "engaged in 'sabotage or subversion' of communications technology in the U.S." (such as causing harm to "critical infrastructure" or tampering with federal elections), and not target end-users necessarily, despite such wording not having been used in the bill itself, and has not commented on complaints about possible uses beyond the bill's stated intent. [5] [4] [6]

In July 2023, it was reported that TikTok parent company ByteDance had spent $100 million on lobbying against the proposed bill, with Warner stating that lawmakers were preparing amendments to clarify the scope of the bill. [8]

In March 2024, the House passed the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act. It accomplishes similar goals to the RESTRICT Act by allowing the government to order the divestment of social media applications owned by or under the jurisdiction of foreign adversaries, or else it would become unlawful for the app to be distributed or maintained in the United States. The bill explicitly names ByteDance Ltd. and its subsidiaries, including TikTok. [9] To expedite its passage in the Senate, a modified version of the bill was incorporated into a foreign aid package. This package was passed by the House and Senate in April 2024. [10] [11]

See also

Related Research Articles

The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States is an inter-agency committee in the United States government that reviews the national security implications of foreign investments in U.S. companies or operations, using classified information from the United States Intelligence Community.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">International Emergency Economic Powers Act</span> United States federal law

The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), Title II of Pub. L.Tooltip Public Law  95–223, 91 Stat. 1626, enacted October 28, 1977, is a United States federal law authorizing the president to regulate international commerce after declaring a national emergency in response to any unusual and extraordinary threat to the United States which has its source in whole or substantial part outside the United States. The act was signed by President Jimmy Carter on December 28, 1977.

Internet censorship in the United States is the suppression of information published or viewed on the Internet in the United States. The First Amendment of the United States Constitution protects freedom of speech and expression against federal, state, and local government censorship.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jeff Jackson (politician)</span> American politician & attorney (born 1982)

Jeffrey Neale Jackson is an American politician, attorney, and military officer serving as the U.S. representative for North Carolina's 14th congressional district since 2023. A member of the Democratic Party, he represented the 37th district in the North Carolina Senate from 2014 to 2022.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Josh Gottheimer</span> American politician (born 1975)

Joshua S. Gottheimer is an American attorney, writer, and public policy adviser who has served as the U.S. representative for New Jersey's 5th congressional district since 2017. The district stretches along the northern border of the state from New York City's densely populated metropolitan suburbs in Bergen County northwest through exurban and rural territory in northern Passaic and Sussex Counties.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mike Gallagher (American politician)</span> American politician (born 1984)

Michael John Gallagher is an American politician who served as a member of the United States House of Representatives, representing Wisconsin's 8th congressional district for the Republican Party between 2017 and 2024.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">ByteDance</span> Chinese internet technology company

ByteDance Ltd. is a Chinese internet technology company headquartered in Haidian, Beijing and incorporated in the Cayman Islands.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Brendan Carr (lawyer)</span> American lawyer (born 1979)

Brendan Thomas Carr is an American lawyer who has served as a member of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) since 2017. Appointed to the position by Donald Trump, Carr previously served as the agency's general counsel and as an aide to FCC commissioner Ajit Pai. In private practice, Carr formerly worked as a telecommunications attorney at Wiley Rein.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">TikTok</span> Video-focused social media platform

TikTok, whose mainland Chinese counterpart is Douyin, is a short-form video hosting service owned by Chinese internet company ByteDance. It hosts user-submitted videos, which can range in duration from three seconds to 60 minutes. It can be accessed with a smart phone app.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Summer Lee</span> American politician (born 1987)

Summer Lynn Lee is an American politician who is the U.S. representative for Pennsylvania's 12th congressional district since 2023. A member of the Democratic Party, Lee was a member of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives for the 34th district from 2019 to 2022. With the support of the local chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), Lee was the first black woman to represent Southwestern Pennsylvania in the state legislature.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Censorship of TikTok</span> Restriction of access to TikTok by governments and organizations

Many countries have imposed past or ongoing restrictions on the video sharing social network TikTok. Bans from government devices usually stem from national security concerns over potential access of data by the Chinese government. Other bans have cited children's well-being and offensive content such as pornography.

The Entity List is a trade restriction list published by the United States Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), consisting of certain foreign persons, entities, or governments. It is published as Supplement 4 of Part 744 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Entities on the Entity List are subject to U.S. license requirements for the export or transfer of specified items, such as some U.S. technologies. However, U.S. persons or companies are not prohibited from purchasing items from a company on the Entity List. Being included on the Entity List is less severe than being designated a "denied person" and more severe than being placed on the Unverified List (UVL).

There is evidence that TikTok has down-weighted the posts of topics deemed sensitive by the Chinese government and Chinese Communist Party. Topics alleged to have been censored by the platform include the Persecution of Uyghurs in China, the 2019–2020 Hong Kong protests, the Sino-Indian border dispute, foreign political leaders, LGBTQ+ people, disabled people, and people of African descent. TikTok has also removed or omitted information from its services to comply with company policies, legal demands, and government censorship laws. A 2024 report found significant disparity between Tiktok and Instagram in relation to the ratio of hashtags on topics deemed sensitve to the Chinese government's interests. TikTok's responses to claims of censorship have varied, responding that the platform was attempting to protect users from bullying, arguing that certain instances were the result of human error, and stating that such incidents were the result of algorithmic mistakes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Donald Trump–TikTok controversy</span> 2020–2021 event

In 2020, the United States government announced that it was considering banning the Chinese social media platform TikTok upon a request from then-president Donald Trump, who viewed the app as a national security threat. The result was that TikTok owner ByteDance—which initially planned on selling a small portion of TikTok to an American company—agreed to divest TikTok to prevent a ban in the United States and in other countries where restrictions are also being considered due to privacy concerns, which themselves are mostly related to its ownership by a firm based in China.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023</span> US omnibus spending bill

The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 is a $1.7 trillion omnibus spending bill funding the U.S. federal government for the 2023 fiscal year. It includes funding for a range of domestic and foreign policy priorities, including support for Ukraine, defense spending, and aid for regions affected by natural disasters. It also includes provisions related to advanced transportation research, health care, electoral reform, and restrictions on the use of the social media app TikTok.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">No TikTok on Government Devices Act</span> United States federal law

The No TikTok on Government Devices Act is a United States federal law that prohibits the use of TikTok on all federal government devices. Originally introduced as a stand-alone bill in 2020, it was signed into law as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 on December 29, 2022, by President Joe Biden.

In April 2024, US president Joe Biden signed into law the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, which is an effective ban or forced sale of TikTok from its parent company ByteDance. The video-sharing platform had sparked concerns over potential user data collection and influence operations by the Chinese government. Previous efforts by the Trump administration to ban the app or force its sale were stopped by the courts and the Biden administration.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act</span> United States legislation

The Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act (PAFACA) is an act of Congress that was signed into law on April 24, 2024, as part of the National Security Act, 2024. It would ban social networking apps within 270 to 360 days if they are determined by the president of the United States and relevant provisions to be a "foreign adversary controlled application". The act explicitly applies to Beijing-based ByteDance Ltd. and its subsidiaries—including TikTok—without the need for additional determination. It ceases to be applicable if an app is sold and no longer considered by the president to be controlled by a foreign adversary of the United States.

Jacob Helberg is an American author and entrepreneur. Helberg currently serves as a commissioner for the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, and senior policy advisor to Alex Karp, CEO of Palantir Technologies. Helberg has commented extensively on US-China relations, and the national security implications of Chinese-developed web apps like TikTok.

<i>TikTok v. Garland</i>

TikTok Inc. and ByteDance Ltd. v. Merrick B. Garland is a lawsuit brought against the United States government. Chinese internet technology company ByteDance and its subsidiary TikTok allege that the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, an act of Congress that forces the divestment of TikTok from ByteDance, violates the First Amendment by imposing an unfeasible deadline for divestment, effectively removing the app.

References

  1. 1 2 3 "White House backs bipartisan bill that could be used to ban TikTok". NBC News. March 7, 2023. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
  2. 1 2 3 "Two New Bills on TikTok and Beyond: The DATA Act and RESTRICT Act". Lawfare. March 23, 2023. Retrieved March 27, 2023.
  3. 1 2 3 "Text - S.686 - 118th Congress (2023-2024): RESTRICT Act | Congress.gov | Library of Congress".
  4. 1 2 3 4 Brown, Elizabeth Nolan (March 29, 2023). "Could the RESTRICT Act Criminalize the Use of VPNs?". Reason.com. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
  5. 1 2 3 "The 'Insanely Broad' RESTRICT Act Could Ban Much More Than Just TikTok". Motherboard. Vice. March 29, 2023. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
  6. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Hodge, Rae (April 2, 2023). ""Patriot Act on steroids": Left and right unite against "fear-mongering" TikTok ban". Salon. Retrieved April 2, 2023.
  7. 1 2 3 4 Hall, Alexander (April 1, 2023). "Bill to ban TikTok slammed as 'Patriot Act for the digital age'". Fox News.
  8. ↑ Shepardson, David (July 11, 2023). "TikTok crackdown bill may need changes, US senator says". Reuters. Retrieved July 13, 2023.
  9. ↑ Maheshwari, Supna; McCabe, David; Karni, Annie (March 13, 2024). "House Passes Bill to Force TikTok Sale From Chinese Owner or Ban the App". The New York Times . Archived from the original on March 13, 2024. Retrieved March 13, 2024.
  10. ↑ Fung, Brian (April 20, 2024). "House passes legislation that could ban TikTok in the US amid high-stakes vote on foreign aid". CNN . Archived from the original on April 20, 2024. Retrieved April 21, 2024.
  11. ↑ O'Brien, Jay; Peller, Lauren; Parkinson, John; Scott, Rachel (April 18, 2024). "A TikTok ban is wrapped in Speaker Johnson's foreign aid package: What happens next?". ABC News. Archived from the original on April 18, 2024. Retrieved April 24, 2024.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.