US companies? I'm with you, no! Foreign companies, absolutley. Even the suspicion of malicious abuse should be enough to ban a foreign company. Foreign persons and entities have no rights in the US and our government owes them as much explanation as they give us when they ban US companies on a whim.
> Foreign persons and entities have no rights in the US
"Yes, immigrants are protected by the U.S. Constitution.
The brief answer is “Yes.” When it comes to key constitutional provisions like due process and equal treatment under the law, the U.S. Constitution applies to all persons – which includes both documented and undocumented immigrants – and not just U.S. citizens.
Outside the context of immigration policy, the Constitution limits government power over individuals but this does not mean that constitutional rights are absolute."
We are not talking about immigrants, we are talking about foreign entities, as in not immigrated to the US. The Chinese communist party and the owners of bytedance have not immigrated to the US.
I don't get the point if the mental gymnastics here. We both know of an active threat to americans by a foreign entity. Companies are not people and being able to create and operate a company is not a protected right. Matter of fact, regulating interstate commerce is an explicit right of the government.
For example, you can't transport alcohol across state lines. The government doesn't need a good reason for that regulation, it's their constitutional right.
In this case, simply reciprocating china's bans on US companies would have done the trick.
Honestly, the US government should move to ban all trade with China within a decade or so.
As for bytedance, the government is not claiming chinese immigrants can't own it, they are claiming that the China based owners of bytedance have to sell their stake in the company since any company in China is under the influence of the MSS as evidenced by many examples, the boyusec/apt3 example I mentioned being one.
