• bastion
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    You’re thinking of laws in terms of obedience. Law is about agreed-upon structure (sometimes functional, often dysfunctional).

    Enforcement is about obedience, and comes up when people don’t go along with the agreed-upon structure. When the structure is made poorly, enforcement has harmful consequences.

    Examples:

    • food stamps (law)
    • no stealing (law)
    • preventing theft or multiple-subscription to food stamps (enforcement)
    • the wilderness act (law)
    • suing the government for not following the wilderness act (enforcement)

    Law and enforcement are closely linked, but definitely distinct.

    They have the authority to create structure (pass laws) regarding foreign powers operating within the States. So they pass laws (create structure) that state the agreed-upon structure, and enable that structure to be enforced.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      7 months ago

      Except we don’t have that power. Not unless there’s a national security threat. And they might make our children more woke isn’t a national security threat.

      American individuals and this company have a first amendment right. Furthermore this isn’t a ban on all foreign owned companies. This is a ban on companies with ownership that have nebulous ties to certain countries. A list we can add to at any time. That is capricious and open to being abused. It’s also unconstitutional under the no Bills of Attainder rule.

      • bastion
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        Except we do have that power. There’s reasonable national security risk, and your lack of understanding of the dynamics involved doesn’t make them nebulous to others.

        In any case, if you don’t like it, vote with your life choices. If it’s not that important, well… …it’s not that important.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          You know nobody has yet to actually say what the risk is. Just that China is evil and therefore a risk. There’s some overblown stuff about them pushing cancel culture but that’s not a national security risk.

          If it’s not nebulous then tell me, how are they getting our nuclear codes with a social media app they don’t directly control?

          And again. No. We have rights in the US. Unless you guys go giving them away because you’re afraid you might see a Chinese video.