As far as power grab politics go, this is a smart move, picking something so popular yet relatively low impact as far as real world issues go. It's a total Trojan Horse of course.
> Attorney General Pam Bondi told tech companies that they could lawfully violate a statute barring American companies from supporting TikTok based on a sweeping claim that President Trump has the constitutional power to set aside laws, newly disclosed documents show.
> Ms. Bondi wrote that Mr. Trump had decided that shutting down TikTok would interfere with his “constitutional duties,” so the law banning the social media app must give way to his “core presidential national security and foreign affairs powers.”
> The letters ... portrayed Mr. Trump as having nullified the legal effects of a statute that Congress passed by large bipartisan majorities in 2024 and that the Supreme Court unanimously upheld.
Of course, all that stuff about vetoes and overriding vetoes in the actual text of the Constitution were just a trap for the previous 250 years of presidents who weren't smart enough to find the secret hidden clause that lets them just arbitrarily decide that certain laws don't apply.
Buckle up, here comes the attempt at a dictatorship. There's a reason our constitution has checks and balances... and no, LEGALLY the president can't just ignore laws. But in this timeline I guess anything goes.
The checks and balances come after the Executive branch (or any of the three branches) oversteps. They can't come before. If all three other branches refuse to do anything about it, how is that not the system working as intended?
the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Trump v. United States (2024) that all presidents have absolute criminal immunity for official acts under core constitutional powers, presumptive immunity for other official acts, and no immunity for unofficial acts.
the current and former POTUS has demonstrated he can ignore laws and that either no one will attempt to bell the cat or, if attempted, succeed in any meaningful way.
Tech people with bold ideas. Don’t go to America. Don’t build your companies there. Don’t employ Americans. Build it anywhere else.
America ain’t what it used to be. It’s slowly but surely becoming a dictatorship and it’ll be run by the dumbest American to ever live: Donald J Trump.
> In letters to companies like Apple and Google, Ms. Bondi wrote that Mr. Trump had decided that shutting down TikTok would interfere with his “constitutional duties,” so the law banning the social media app must give way to his “core presidential national security and foreign affairs powers.”
This is like tariff negotiations with the whole world being about a fentanyl emergency. I can't wait to hear oral arguments on this in 2027 after this supposed power is temporarily upheld from the shadow docket.
Ridiculous that this got flagged. Do people think that Trump rewriting laws to suit his whim isn't going to become relevant to their own companies and projects?
I don't think it's ridiculous that it got flagged - it's only superficially about technology, and is instead mostly about general US politics. Many people don't think HN is the place to discuss general US politics. (I wouldn't personally flag it since it doesn't seem like it's already all over multiple news sites.)
There's no "instead". This story is extremely relevant to the many HNers who run tech companies or make regulatory decisions on their behalf. They need to know that tech regulations are written by executive fiat now, they can't trust that any statutory text means what it says, and many of their competitors are seeking out ways to bribe the Trump regime for regulatory advantages.
I understand that a lot of those people enjoy the polite fiction that partisan controversies in Washington have nothing to do with their jobs. I do too, and I hope that we can get back to a world where it's practical soon. But sticking your head in the sand won't save you.
Honestly, no, it's not the least bit surprising that this was flagged. It's a damn-near inevitable consequence of letting anyone on the internet flag things.
What's truly ridiculous (though not surprising [0]) is that it still hasn't been white listed by HN moderators. They're the ones who bear responsibility for this major story being suppressed.
I'd expect them to be especially interested! It's virtually certain that some number of YC companies over the next four years will find themselves in a similar position to TikTok over the next four years, wondering whether they can get away with bribing Trump to rewrite a law in their favor.
On the one hand, this is terrifying precedent for future behavior. On the other hand, the ban is stupid and shouldn't exist, so it's hard for me to get upset. Sometimes the right things happen in the wrong way.
If he wants the ban gone, he should push for Congress to overturn it, with whatever veto threats or other political pressure he wants to offer as motivation. He shouldn’t claim a broad power to ignore the law. And he can’t credibly claim the TikTok ban is unconstitutional when it’s already been upheld by SCOTUS.
This is the way. When you control all three branches of government, why not use that power to do things the right way? Not doing it the right way is the power grab, and that's the point.
That's why this is the perfect issue for an autocratic power grab: there will be many who applaud it, even those who are young and vehemently opposed to him. Standing on principles can be difficult, as it often requires losing something you love.
Democrats should just declare they hold the law as valid and any tech company that ignores it will suffer the consequences it prescribes when they come back into power.
That's part of an obvious winning strategy, but the establishment is too stupid and weak to notice that hate and resentment are the main drivers of modern politics. Instead, they'll keep trying to "build bridges" and "seek bipartisanship" with a group of people that cheer on the murder of one of them [1].
The establishment aren't stupid and weak when they're fighting progressive candidates, third parties, or peaceful anti-genocide protesters. Or when they're enabling a holocaust while pretending to 'work tirelessly for a ceasefire'. They're shockingly competent when they want to be.
And the 'bipartisan' 'reaching out across the isle' has been their go-to since Obama used his super-majority to pass a Republican health care plan and ignore his campaign promises around torture, abortion, etc. I'm amazed it's still working for them.
The other ones they love to use are 'they go low we go high', or, 'we're just following procedure'; like when they 'failed' [0] to prevent a rapist, racist insurrectionist from running for Presidency again.
will suffer the consequences it prescribes if they come back into power.
I guess we'll see in the mid-terms, but there's no guarantee at this point. A few special elections is not a telling of things to come for the whole country regardless of how many news articles hoping it does. Do not count on a blue wave as much as you would like it to happen. The right is just that much better at getting their message out than the left will ever be. It's much easier when you can just make stuff up and lie about everything that is verifiably false and your base eats it up. You can't counter that, at least they have shown no concept of being able to yet.
> The right is just that much better at getting their message out than the left will ever be.
Absolutely true of the democrats, not so much of the actual left. Look at Mamdani's meteoric rise in the NYC mayoral primaries. Granted, it was in a very progressive city but still.
I am absolutely a single issue voter, for as long as Trump is alive, on who will promise the most punishment for him and everyone associated with him for their misdeeds.
As far as power grab politics go, this is a smart move, picking something so popular yet relatively low impact as far as real world issues go. It's a total Trojan Horse of course.
No different than sanctuary cities or the de facto legalization of marijuana.
It is different, because no one purported that those things made illegal immigrants or substances permanently legal.
They just decided not to prioritize enforcement.
> Attorney General Pam Bondi told tech companies that they could lawfully violate a statute barring American companies from supporting TikTok based on a sweeping claim that President Trump has the constitutional power to set aside laws, newly disclosed documents show.
> Ms. Bondi wrote that Mr. Trump had decided that shutting down TikTok would interfere with his “constitutional duties,” so the law banning the social media app must give way to his “core presidential national security and foreign affairs powers.”
> The letters ... portrayed Mr. Trump as having nullified the legal effects of a statute that Congress passed by large bipartisan majorities in 2024 and that the Supreme Court unanimously upheld.
Of course, all that stuff about vetoes and overriding vetoes in the actual text of the Constitution were just a trap for the previous 250 years of presidents who weren't smart enough to find the secret hidden clause that lets them just arbitrarily decide that certain laws don't apply.
Buckle up, here comes the attempt at a dictatorship. There's a reason our constitution has checks and balances... and no, LEGALLY the president can't just ignore laws. But in this timeline I guess anything goes.
He hasn't abided by any checks nor balances so far. If you're not buckled up long ago, what exactly were you waiting for?
3 replies →
The checks and balances come after the Executive branch (or any of the three branches) oversteps. They can't come before. If all three other branches refuse to do anything about it, how is that not the system working as intended?
5 replies →
LEGALLY:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_immunity_in_the_U...
PRACTICALLY:
Things really are getting scary.
Tech people with bold ideas. Don’t go to America. Don’t build your companies there. Don’t employ Americans. Build it anywhere else.
America ain’t what it used to be. It’s slowly but surely becoming a dictatorship and it’ll be run by the dumbest American to ever live: Donald J Trump.
18 replies →
[dead]
[flagged]
3 replies →
> In letters to companies like Apple and Google, Ms. Bondi wrote that Mr. Trump had decided that shutting down TikTok would interfere with his “constitutional duties,” so the law banning the social media app must give way to his “core presidential national security and foreign affairs powers.”
This is like tariff negotiations with the whole world being about a fentanyl emergency. I can't wait to hear oral arguments on this in 2027 after this supposed power is temporarily upheld from the shadow docket.
Ridiculous that this got flagged. Do people think that Trump rewriting laws to suit his whim isn't going to become relevant to their own companies and projects?
I don't think it's ridiculous that it got flagged - it's only superficially about technology, and is instead mostly about general US politics. Many people don't think HN is the place to discuss general US politics. (I wouldn't personally flag it since it doesn't seem like it's already all over multiple news sites.)
There's no "instead". This story is extremely relevant to the many HNers who run tech companies or make regulatory decisions on their behalf. They need to know that tech regulations are written by executive fiat now, they can't trust that any statutory text means what it says, and many of their competitors are seeking out ways to bribe the Trump regime for regulatory advantages.
I understand that a lot of those people enjoy the polite fiction that partisan controversies in Washington have nothing to do with their jobs. I do too, and I hope that we can get back to a world where it's practical soon. But sticking your head in the sand won't save you.
1 reply →
Honestly, no, it's not the least bit surprising that this was flagged. It's a damn-near inevitable consequence of letting anyone on the internet flag things.
What's truly ridiculous (though not surprising [0]) is that it still hasn't been white listed by HN moderators. They're the ones who bear responsibility for this major story being suppressed.
0 - Growing list of recent falsely flagged stories here: https://news.ycombinator.com/favorites?id=mandmandam
Not so ridiculous when you realize who runs this site.
I'd expect them to be especially interested! It's virtually certain that some number of YC companies over the next four years will find themselves in a similar position to TikTok over the next four years, wondering whether they can get away with bribing Trump to rewrite a law in their favor.
They still believe they're in the in-group maybe? Or they're just that ideologically captive.
On the one hand, this is terrifying precedent for future behavior. On the other hand, the ban is stupid and shouldn't exist, so it's hard for me to get upset. Sometimes the right things happen in the wrong way.
If he wants the ban gone, he should push for Congress to overturn it, with whatever veto threats or other political pressure he wants to offer as motivation. He shouldn’t claim a broad power to ignore the law. And he can’t credibly claim the TikTok ban is unconstitutional when it’s already been upheld by SCOTUS.
This is the way. When you control all three branches of government, why not use that power to do things the right way? Not doing it the right way is the power grab, and that's the point.
That's why this is the perfect issue for an autocratic power grab: there will be many who applaud it, even those who are young and vehemently opposed to him. Standing on principles can be difficult, as it often requires losing something you love.
No - don’t fall for it
We have a system in place to undo congressional action
That never justifies doing them the wrong way.
[dead]
Democrats should just declare they hold the law as valid and any tech company that ignores it will suffer the consequences it prescribes when they come back into power.
That's part of an obvious winning strategy, but the establishment is too stupid and weak to notice that hate and resentment are the main drivers of modern politics. Instead, they'll keep trying to "build bridges" and "seek bipartisanship" with a group of people that cheer on the murder of one of them [1].
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jun/17/melissa-hort...
The establishment aren't stupid and weak when they're fighting progressive candidates, third parties, or peaceful anti-genocide protesters. Or when they're enabling a holocaust while pretending to 'work tirelessly for a ceasefire'. They're shockingly competent when they want to be.
And the 'bipartisan' 'reaching out across the isle' has been their go-to since Obama used his super-majority to pass a Republican health care plan and ignore his campaign promises around torture, abortion, etc. I'm amazed it's still working for them.
The other ones they love to use are 'they go low we go high', or, 'we're just following procedure'; like when they 'failed' [0] to prevent a rapist, racist insurrectionist from running for Presidency again.
0 - https://sarahkendzior.substack.com/p/servants-of-the-mafia-s...
1 reply →
The Democrats are controlled opposition, they don't actually give a damn as long as they maintain power in the new regime.
will suffer the consequences it prescribes if they come back into power.
I guess we'll see in the mid-terms, but there's no guarantee at this point. A few special elections is not a telling of things to come for the whole country regardless of how many news articles hoping it does. Do not count on a blue wave as much as you would like it to happen. The right is just that much better at getting their message out than the left will ever be. It's much easier when you can just make stuff up and lie about everything that is verifiably false and your base eats it up. You can't counter that, at least they have shown no concept of being able to yet.
> The right is just that much better at getting their message out than the left will ever be.
Absolutely true of the democrats, not so much of the actual left. Look at Mamdani's meteoric rise in the NYC mayoral primaries. Granted, it was in a very progressive city but still.
I am absolutely a single issue voter, for as long as Trump is alive, on who will promise the most punishment for him and everyone associated with him for their misdeeds.
[flagged]
[dead]