The Unseen Hand: How Presidential Orders Kept TikTok Alive in the US
More than half a year after the highly publicized "ban" on TikTok, the popular short-form video app continues to thrive in the United States. While the public debated its fate, a series of previously undisclosed letters from Attorney General Pam Bondi to tech giants like Apple, Google, Amazon, Oracle, and Microsoft reveal the executive branch's direct intervention that allowed these companies to bypass the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act.
The law, designed to force a divestiture or ban of TikTok due to national security concerns, was enacted with a January 19, 2025, deadline for compliance. Indeed, for a brief period, TikTok disappeared from app stores. However, new insights reveal that President Donald Trump's administration took swift and decisive action to prevent an abrupt shutdown, citing constitutional duties related to national security and foreign affairs.
The Executive Override: "Interference with Constitutional Duties"
The core of the legal maneuver lies in a letter dated January 30, 2025, where Attorney General Pam Bondi informed Apple and Google that "the President has determined that an abrupt shutdown of the TikTok platform would interfere with the execution of the President's constitutional duties to take care of the national security and foreign affairs of the United States." This statement effectively served as a presidential directive, allowing these companies to "continue to provide services to TikTok… without incurring any legal liability."
This initial letter was followed by another on April 5, 2025, the day after Trump granted TikTok another 75-day reprieve. In this subsequent communication, Bondi went even further, stating that the Department of Justice was "irrevocably relinquishing any claims the United States might have had against" the companies "for the conduct proscribed in the Act during the Covered Period and Extended Covered Period, with respect to TikTok and the larger family of ByteDance Ltd. and TikTok, Inc. applications covered under the Act." This provided a stronger assurance of immunity, easing the concerns of companies like Apple and Google about potential penalties for non-compliance.
The Lawsuit that Exposed the Letters
The existence of these crucial letters came to light thanks to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed by Tony Tan. Tan, a software engineer and Google shareholder, is currently suing Google for not complying with the TikTok ban, arguing that the company is exposing itself and its shareholders to significant legal liability by continuing to host the app. His lawsuit highlights a fascinating legal battle at the intersection of national security, executive power, and corporate responsibility.
Implications and Unanswered Questions
The disclosure of these letters sheds light on the complex interplay between legislative intent, executive authority, and the realities of enforcing a widespread ban on a popular digital platform. While the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act was passed by Congress and even upheld by the Supreme Court, the President's assertion of constitutional duties has, so far, effectively overridden its immediate enforcement.
This situation raises several critical questions:
Precedent of Executive Power: What precedent does this set for future presidential administrations to unilaterally suspend or delay the enforcement of laws based on perceived interference with constitutional duties?
Corporate Liability: Despite the DOJ's assurances, does the underlying law still expose these tech companies to long-term legal risks if political winds shift in the future? Tony Tan's lawsuit certainly suggests so.
National Security vs. Public Interest: How will the government balance national security concerns with the widespread public use and economic impact of platforms like TikTok?
The Future of TikTok: With President Trump reportedly making progress on a potential sale of TikTok, will a new ownership structure finally bring the app into compliance with the law, or will the executive branch continue to exercise its discretion?
The saga of TikTok's ban that wasn't continues to evolve, revealing the intricate layers of legal and political maneuvering that shape the digital landscape. The newly public letters from Attorney General Pam Bondi offer a rare glimpse into the powerful role of executive discretion in navigating such high-stakes conflicts.
