TikTok Is Back Online as Trump Proposes Nationalizing It
While pledging to postpone the ban by executive order, the incoming president said the government should have a 50-percent ownership stake in the app.

Just hours after going dark, TikTok is back online—though nothing, legally, has changed.
Just after midnight on Sunday, the popular but maligned Chinese-owned app ceased operation in the United States; users logging on received a message that the service "isn't available right now" but "we are fortunate that President [Donald] Trump has indicated that he will work with us on a solution to reinstate TikTok once he takes office."
As it turned out, they didn't even have to wait for Trump's inauguration on Monday.
"I'm asking companies not to let TikTok stay dark!" Trump posted on Truth Social Sunday morning. "I will issue an executive order on Monday to extend the period of time before the law's prohibitions take effect, so that we can make a deal to protect our national security. The order will also confirm that there will be no liability for any company that helped keep TikTok from going dark before my order."
Early Sunday afternoon, the platform returned for U.S. users. "In agreement with our service providers, TikTok is in the process of restoring service," TikTok said in a post on X. "We thank President Trump for providing the necessary clarity and assurance to our service providers that they will face no penalties providing TikTok to over 170 million Americans and allowing over 7 million small businesses to thrive."
The law signed by President Joe Biden in April 2024, requiring TikTok to divest from Chinese parent company ByteDance or shut down U.S. operations, notably remains in effect—the only difference is that both the incoming president and the company at issue have each decided for the time being to pretend that it doesn't apply.
It's far from clear that Trump can accomplish his promise simply through an executive order. "A president…might tell the Department of Justice not to enforce the law for now, but he cannot suspend or delay the law itself," Walter Olson, senior fellow at the Cato Institute's Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies, tells Reason. "The law creates obligations not only for TikTok but also for third parties such as Google and Apple (re: distributing the TikTok app) and a president cannot necessarily shield them from all the possible consequences of breaking the law."
But Trump went further than simply pledging to bring TikTok back online, saying in his post on Sunday that the platform should be effectively nationalized, with American taxpayers owning half of it.
"My initial thought is a joint venture between the current owners and/or new owners whereby the U.S. gets a 50% ownership in a joint venture set up between the U.S. and whichever purchase we so choose," Trump wrote.
Trump's proposal effectively suggests he would be amenable to Beijing-based ByteDance retaining ownership, so long as that ownership is shared by the literal U.S. government.
The proposal puts a particularly ironic spin on the whole affair between TikTok and the federal government. Supporters justified the law on the premise that an app, even if privately owned, could not be allowed to operate in the U.S. if its parent company were based in China, a censorial authoritarian state that could force the platform to prioritize content it approved of.
In response, for the first time in American history, Congress singled out one company as forbidden by law to operate within its borders. And the solution, to get around the ban enforced by federal decree, is apparently for the platform to be jointly owned by the very government that banned it from operating there in the first place.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Oh the fucking irony.
You slept it off!
He just woke up.
He also doesn't know what irony means.
Plenty of midwits don’t get it.
Sarc barely qualifies as a midwit. He’s more of a halfwit.
I was trying to be kind!
I know, right!
Joe Biden, the guy who swore to obey the constitution and the limits of his office unilaterally declares the ERA ratifified - decades after the legal limit expired - and then refuses to uphold the law when the TikTok ban is judged legal.
While Trump, the erstwhile 'dictator on dat one' declares that he will work within the limits of his office.
Fascism is always descending on Trump but landing on Biden.
Sarc genuinely can't understand that. He knows orangemanbad, and that is his mental touchstone from everything.
Surprised you didn't lead off with your daily strawman.
I’m not seeing the irony.
Evil Devil-Communists believe that shit should belong to Government Almighty! . . .
So Our Dear Leader will meet the Evil Devil-Communists halfway, and let their Government Almighty own half of shit, and let our Government Almighty own the other half of shit!
(Yes, "shit" here DOES include our freedoms!)
How about the government just stay out of a company's business? Don't ban it, but don't "nationalize" it or take ownership of it. Let it sink or swim on its own accord.
Ok. Just so long as all ChiCom ownership and influence is eliminated.
US government ownership is ok though, because commies did it first.
“Reason never criticizes commies!”
How’d I do?
Are you trying to get “muted” or something?
*shakes fist*
There can only be one “ambassador “.
But we call can join the list.
POST THE LIST SARC!
There isn’t a list.
Out of the pan and into the fire.
It's different when Trump does it.
I remember you complaining hard when Biden did it, no wait...
Which, according to you and your gang's rules, means I supported it.
You totally support this. You never criticized it. Don't back out now.
Nice try, asshole.
1. You do love your strawmen arguments, don't you?
2. You also seem to love false equivalency as much as your butt buddy Jeffy.
3. You also love attacking the person with ad hominem arguments even though you deny you do so, thus lying as much as Shrike.
"You totally support this. You never criticized it. Don't back out now."
Pay attention, Drunky.
1. I don't support the US government owning a social media company. Period. It's a terrible idea.
2. Trump said "My initial thought is a joint venture between the current owners and/or new owners whereby the U.S. gets a 50% ownership in a joint venture set up between the U.S. and whichever purchase we so choose".
That's all.
You and Lancaster are pretending his "initial thought" is a "proposal".
That's Sarcasmic principles, folks.
Got straw, Sarc?
Not because commies did it first, but because Congress did. I think it's brilliant.
The Chinese can ban American-owned TikTok in China if they choose too.
Oh, wait, its already banned there.
I spoke too soon. You have a variant of your daily strawman.
Fire made no mention of who should own it, just that it shouldn’t be the CCP.
Are you okay man?
Why? Who put you in charge?
You think the US government shouldn't have controlled Facebook et al and forced them to be censorious asshats, but it's OK for them to be censorious asshats for TikTok?
Principles, you ain't got 'em.
Principles, you ain't got 'em.
You're finally catching on. For our resident Trump defenders, it's all about who not what. Principals, not principles.
You dream about Trump don’t you?
I haven't scrolled the whole thread yet, but I haven't seen anyone say it's a great idea yet, like Sarc is claiming.
Sarc never said a peep when Biden signed on to banning TikTok, and nobody I've seen yet has approved of the government buying it, but the retarded hypocritical fuck is trying to do victory laps.
Sarc is easily the least principled poster here. Worse than Shrike and worse than Lying Jeffy, and this proves it. But look at him pretend it's everyone else.
What a joke.
By your rules an absence of attacks equals praise. None of your gang is attacking Trump for this. That means you all applaud it.
Ideas™ !
Are these the high "ideas" you talk about so often?
"By your rules an absence of attacks equals praise."
But that's not what you do, fuckhead. You do nothing but attack anyone who goes against the Democrats, and run defense for them.
That's Sarcasmic's principles for you, folks.
Give it a rest, bud. You've never been principled.
Says the guy who tries to fit in with the popular kids by being a dick. There's a good reason I compare these comments to middle school.
Nice, attack the person, not the ideas. I wonder what we call that? Ad hom, something? Oh yes, ad hominem.
You're not exactly one to talk. You ain't got principles yourself. Of course, if not for double standards, Sarc, you'd completely lack standards whatsoever.
Who did the US government tell TikTok to censor?
Because too many people think the other people will use government to their own nefarious ends, so they want to jump in first for their own nefarious ends of preventing the other nefarious ends.
Control freaks the lot.
Then they scream "Muh National Security" like that one idiot hollering about garlic imports.
Just control freaks. Private property is meaningless in the face of National Security. It's the root password to the Constitution.
In response, for the first time in American history, Congress singled out one company as forbidden by law to operate within its borders
That may or may not be true, but here in California we take a different approach: the ruling party gets to exclude specific companies from legislation, suck as exempting Newsom’s pals at Panera from minimum wage increases, or hiring retired Barbara Boxer to lobby for exempting ride share companies from providing mandated employee benefits.
https://apnews.com/article/california-governor-newsom-panera-bread-fast-food-faca8695e96b0f3224da2ba6d0657e3b
Let’s not forget Babs:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/08/29/aoc-rips-barbara-boxer-helping-lyft-fight-california-bill/2158941001/
Well, sure, but now that Congress has cut that avenue off, isn't this a great way to tell Congress to fuck off?
Like Amtrak or public broadcasting?
This would be worse than Obama nationalizing GM. At least that didn't threaten the First Amendment. Is it even possible for the government to own TikTok without a chilling effect?
Here we thought Trump was saving us from wokeism on Twitter and Facebook, and now he's trying to hand TikTok to the progressives on a silver platter. And someday (theoretically) the progressives will be in charge again.
I think Trump is just trying to make his permanent mark on history.
Maybe Trump should just donate TruthSocial to the taxpayers instead?
I think Trump is just trying to make his permanent mark on history.
He's already made several permanent skid-marks on the underpants of history.
I thought i recognized your face there.
No one talks about Trump as much as sarc. I think he might be into him.
He's three sheets to the wind and trying to troll, and failing miserably.
Sarc keeps an 8x10” glossy of Trump glued to the wall of his refrigerator box. Which he bitterly masturbates to every day while posting his moronic drunken ravings here.
It has to be glossy so he can wipe it off later.
Your Trump obsession seems to know no bounds. Tell me, Sarc, do you fantasize about Trump in your sleep?
Are you saying the chilling effect is somehow greater for a US gov't - Chinese joint venture than for the USA to outlaw its operation completely? Permitting something conditionally is more libertarian than forbidding it entirely.
Look at it from the POV of the average person: someone who wants to watch vids online. Isn't it a greater diminution of their liberty to cut them off entirely than to give them this choice?
I see too much wrong analysis of matters like this. Monopoly gives people more freedom than zeropoly. 1 is greater than 0. The idea is not to be anti-government, but to be pro-freedom. We've discussed this here before, but other libertarians keep making this mistake.
"Are you saying the chilling effect is somehow greater for a US gov't - Chinese joint venture than for the USA to outlaw its operation completely?
The bill didn't outlaw the operation completely.
It prohibited them from sharing data with the Chinese Communist Party.
https://reason.com/volokh/2025/01/17/all-the-things-tiktok-v-garland-did-not-decide/
...
Don't you get it? Instead of letting the progressives constantly carp about their lack of power from the outside, he's like, "Oh, so you think you're so smart? Here, take it over, let's see how you do with it when you're in charge, har-har!"
KEN SCHULTZ!
It's been a while. Missed your posting. Stick around.
WORD!
Welcoma back Ken!
Familiar handle; welcome back, if so.
But, yeah, he's proposing PBS on steroids; NOT a good idea. Ban it if the CCP data collection is a real issue, but DO NOT turn it over to the US government; nothing good comes of that.
This, IMO, seems like the usual Trump 'spin to facilitate the deal or outcome'.
He, originally proposed or supported the ban. Now he's delaying it and talking about keeping it alive. Possibly to make Congress the foil, possibly, the process is the punishment. Enough flip-flopping and it won't matter.
The idea that the government can't own TikTok without chilling or critically endangering free speech is patently retarded. Ignoring the fact that the government outright shut suppressed free speech fairly openly in recent history to act like "The government can't break up Ma Bell or impose the Fairness Doctrine without critically curtailing free speech."
We, absolutely should not be paying for TikTok with public tax dollars. However, the idea that we are or that, once again, Trump, and not China, is some sort of existential and critical threat to human liberty because it's 2025 and not 1925 is, once again, stupid.
Equal rights?
Biden ignores the law by not banning it.
Trump ignores the law by not banning it.
Why does congress pass laws again?
For sound bites and photo ops. Duh!
The law included a 90 day delay post enactment which is what Trump is using. He has said nothing about it permanently.
Just require the data to be housed locally in the US by a US company.
And maybe not allow the Chinese communists access?
But when the EU tries the same to US companies, that's Marxism or something.
Microsoft set up a data center in Ireland for the express purpose of keeping the US's grubby hands off it. The US courts told Microsoft too bad anyway.
Principles. Individualism. Private property. Anybody heard of them?
4A doesn't apply to third parties. So the police, FBI, etc. can rummage through that data as much as they want.
But that's ok because Trump, right?
Bloody hypocrite.
Where did someone say that, you disingenuous drunk?
Failure to attack equals praise. Your rules.
Pour sarc.
Sure it is Drunky. Sure it is.
Right, dipshit.
"Failure to attack equals praise. Your rules."
Nope. Running defense and white knighting for the Democratic Party equals praise.
You're a Democratic Party apologist. Stop pretending you're not.
Did you buy stock in straw farming and trying to see how many strawmen you can post in a day?
If tik tok is truly a national security threat, arrest everyone using it for treason.
(the dems would love to use that against Trump!)
"My initial thought is a joint venture between the current owners and/or new owners whereby the U.S. gets a 50% ownership in a joint venture set up between the U.S. and whichever purchase we so choose," Trump wrote.
I'll be honest, that's clear as mud.
The leap from that to "Nationalizing" has been astounding in the contemporary-traditional "I'm meeting with the Joint Chiefs..."/"WWIII is starting!" sense.
Lincoln shut down several newspapers and progressively since we've had the VOA, COI, OWI, USIA, CIA, USAGM, RFE/RL, and all the branches and news outlet subsidiaries, right up until Media and the DNC *without* ownership deals mutually agreed to censor some of the world's largest and most damning stories about the government's misdeeds against it's own people in peacetime but, suddenly, a Chinese-owned short-form video company is the lynchpin of Free Speech in the West.
Why do people say such things?
No, jackass, "midnight" is middle of the night, end of the day kind of thing. People wake up and say "I went to sleep last night", not "this night".
The day was Sunday alright, but the time was just after midnight on Saturday, Sunday morning, Saturday night.
Someone told me a lot of contracts specify times of "00:01" and "23:59" because lawyers like to pretend "00:00" and "24:00" are not clear and unambiguous. I guess Joe Lancaster proves that.
Bipartisan destruction of the 1st Amendment?
Congress: YES!
SCOTUS: YES!
Trump, "Naw, Just kidding."
F these clowns. They don't have any idea what nation they're suppose to be representing. The US Constitution forbids them from abridging the press. So unless they bring substantial evidence to the table about 'national security' they can just go F themselves.
Trump was the first one to suggest banning it in 2020. He literally started this entire circus.
And given that you are a TDS-addled slimy pile of shit, most any of your posts can be ignored.
And he got no brownie points from me for doing that.
Now. Tell us about how Biden and Democrats made it happen.
"Nationalized"
Maybe the Libertarian on his cabinet will be the lead on this... 😉
It's far from clear that Trump can accomplish his promise simply through an executive order.
Looks like an EO wasn’t even necessary.
Should we thank the Office of Government Efficiency for this?
TikTok Is Back Online as Trump Proposes Nationalizing It
OK world. Permission to laugh at us granted. Biden completes his presidency as a complete joke. Trump says hold (and nationalize) my beer.
I'd trust my data with China over the US any day (as long as I live in the US).
Trump defenders will defend this. Not sure how, but they will. Probably with attacks. The "pound the table" strategy.
I wonder if this will be one of the things we ignore that he said or one the things we ignore that he did.
Yes.
Everyone should know by now that you take what he says with a huge grain of salt until there is some action (and also that you should always read the primary source, transcript or tweet, because the media can’t be trusted to accurately state what he said/tweeted).
Everyone should know by now that you take what he says with a huge grain of salt until there is some action
You'd think, but I can't tell how many times I criticized Trump's record and I get flamed with someone saying, "that was then, but now he says xyz...." then I criticize something he says and get "You can't take him literally. Name one time he did xyz..."
If Trump says something, I have to guess if he means it or is just a blurting, blustering, bluffing, or bloviating blowhard. The mere fact he has the instinct to blurt out a Rubicon crossing nationalization plan is a red flag to me.
Yes, it is a warning to keep an eye on the detailed actions that follow. Nothing wrong with that.
Nationalizing it?!
I was told Trump is the most libertarian president ever. How times change!
OMG you don't know anything at all about logic. Nationalizing companies was communist when Obama did it, but it's libertarian when Trump does it. You are supposed to judge based upon who, not what. Principals, not principles. Are you a leftist or something?
Hey drunky. Who here is saying nationalizing TikTok is a good idea?
You're so fucking dishonest.
I do wonder of these lefties on this thread ever yelled at Trump saying to defend NPR....
Or the fact government funds all their censorship groups like Newsguard.
I'm sure this is (D)ifferent
"...I was told Trump is the most libertarian president ever. How times change!..."
Are you familiar with the term "non-sequitur", dipshit? You should learn what it means before you make a public ass of yourself. Again.
One way I could make an ass of myself would be to suggest nationalizing Tik Tok, but that's already taken.
And that would be the wrong way, TDS addled steaming pile of shit. If that is a surprise to you, you are more abysmally stupid than your posts suggest.
Fuck off and die, slimy pile of TDS addled shit; make your family proud, asshole.
Never change, Sevo, never change.
Who says ever? I always see it qualified with “since Calvin Coolidge” or “in my lifetime”, which are such incredibly low bars that shrike or Tony could accidentally trip over them and accomplish the same thing.
More wondrous strawmen.
Having scrolled the whole thread and the other one, I didn’t see anyone defending it being nationalized.
Hell, most of the posts in the other thread amounted to “who cares if it goes away”, not overt support of the ban. Also, the possibility of this happening has been known for 5 years, it’s kind of surprising to me that some enterprising coder hasn’t managed to make a clone of TikTok, ready to launch and fill the void in Gen Z’s black hole of desperation.
Nationalizing (if that is in fact what he meant) it is a fucking stupid idea, fwiw.
You missed all my posts then.
Fair enough, though I got the sense it was more the sense of “fuck you progressives” that you were enjoying rather than the specific policy.
That's part of it, but would not justify the move on its own.
Let’s see what happens here, Trump says a lot of crazy stuff. Just like the bipartisan Nippon Steel thing, it’s a ridiculous interference in the free market pricing that amounts to price fixing racketeering. There are rumors of Musk or Leary buying it?
He wants to set up TikTok in Greenland, with the information stored in the locks of the Panama Canal.
Duh!
Yeah man ... Won't need a 'national defense' at all once the whole USA is put up for sale to foreigners. /s
Otherwise "it’s a ridiculous interference in the free market pricing that amounts to price fixing racketeering"
(4) D.C. States is the USA landmass in the Nippon Steel deal.
If you're going to start selling off State's worth of land why not sell CA to Mexico.
I think this is a brilliant move by Trump, calling the bluff of those who said they didn't want a controlling interest in China. If there's no other buyer, having the USA own the controlling interest is just a great fuck-you to those complainers.
In my generation the common question was, where were you when JFK was assassinated? For gen Z it will be, where were you when Trump saved TikTok?
Do you like fart dust or something?
Ideas!
Where were you when the Trumpanzees went apeshit, and almost hung Mike Pence?
Nowhere. Because it never happened regardless of what Salon told you.
OK, lemme guess... The Moon landings and the Holocaust were also both fakes!
Nope. Just your J6 hoax material.
When was Mike Pence hung again?
You do realize your Trump hating fronts tried to kill Trump twice? You know eBay they say about glass houses.
"When was Mike Pence hung again?"
Never, and I never said that shit happened!
So mobs trying to murder democracy is totes OK with you? TRYING is OK, and ass long ass shit doesn't work, then no harm, no foul? Can I shoot 35 bullets at you, and if I miss every time, shit's totes OK with you, then?
Trump tried to murder democracy, and some violent assholes tried to murder Him, in turn! His murderers got punished, and He did SNOT! Geezum, shit's almost like The Emperor doesn't have to follow the rules that the peons must follow!
I don't know whether there are definitive answers to these questions.
1. Does TikTok collect user data without users knowing - and do they care?
2. Does TikTok allow China's intelligence agencies access to users' smartphones - i.e., does TikTok have a spyware component?
3. Did the classified information the SC received include a recommendation that if it convinced the SC to ban it or require the sale, the SC for the sake of appearances should try to find a reason for rejecting TikTok's suit based on public information?
"...2. Does TikTok allow China's intelligence agencies access to users' smartphones - i.e., does TikTok have a spyware component?..."
Have you read anything regarding Mosad and Hamas switch to pagers from 'phones? If you imagine a large 'commercial' operation headquartered in China which does not have a CCP component which is using it to surreptitiously collect data against all possible opponents, you are dumber than you seem from your posts, which is hard to believe.
BTW, I do have controlling interest in the north anchorage of a nearby bridge, and if you act quickly, I can get it for you in the low 6-figures; you seem just the person to make the deal.
How much would the US government need to pay China for half of TikTok? Maybe if the purchase of TikTok is subject to a tariff, it would be like getting half of TikTok for free, or making China pay to give the US government half of TikTok. That seems awesome!
Once the US government owns half of TikTok, a government department (that is not really a department) will be needed to do the administrative and data collection work. We should pick the name now. Maybe "DTOK". We could ask Elon to run the department, but he has his hands full with cutting trillions in spending. But if Elon did run DTOK, maybe it would be safe from spending cuts. And the US government could sell the data for a profit maybe. This could be a win-win-win for everybody!
Frankly I'd peg the whole thing on Gov-Gun "censorship of the data".
More than any theories of "sell the data".
How much is anonymous/voluntary data worth after all?
For Sarc, a “Tulpa” definition:
https://x.com/reddit_lies/status/1881146129825313135?s=46&t=qeA47-JjK6vq0pfnxg60dA
FYI, a "tulpa" is basically an imaginary friend.
Lol, I knew it.
More specifically, an entity of some sort brought into existence by people’s belief in them. Or Sarc’s case, his drunken delusions, which are legion.
*My* tulpa is the undefeated champion of The Game. Everyone else, including me, always loses.
Whoa, for once, Marxist Moose-Mammary Necrophiliac Farter-Fuhrer did SNOT write something UDDERLY stupid and evil!
Wasn't a fan of the ban but Congress has control of foreign commerce and the CCP shouldn't have access to our information/communication systems. But for godsakes DO NOT NATIONALIZE THIS! That's straight communism, and will have a far worse/deeper consequences for America. Congress can't run itself, and now its going to run Tiktok? Congress will spend that new revenue stream and will do what it can to protect that stream, even to the detriment of other SM sites.
"Congress singled out one company as forbidden by law to operate within its borders". Isn't that a bill of attainder?