A federal judge has barred the Trump administration, for the moment, from enforcing IEEPA sanctions against TikTok. Here’s why.
Latest in International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA)
Is TikTok’s suit against the government likely to succeed? Not in conventional terms—but maybe that’s not the right way to look at it.
Does it matter that President Trump last Friday night issued a CFIUS order directing ByteDance to divest itself from TikTok, given that a week earlier he already had levied IEEPA sanctions on the company? Yes indeed.
The administration’s move may invite additional restrictions on the application of a key U.S. foreign and security tool.
Over the weekend, President Trump cited a 1977 statute, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), as providing the legal authority he would need to carry through on his “order” that American companies “immediately start looking for an alternative to China.” IEEPA, which serves as the legal basis for many of America’s economic sanctions programs, almost certainly gives Trump the legal power he claims.
Why Is the US More Likely to Sanction Chinese Companies for Supporting Iran than for Supporting North Korea?
Lost amid the fallout of President Trump’s firing of FBI Director James Comey last week was the U.S. Treasury Department’s announcement of new sanctions on individuals and companies found to be supporting Iran’s missile program. Four of the seven new sanctions targets are Chinese. This matters because although this is the second time since President Trump has taken office that the U.S.
The other day, Benjamin Wittes and Will McCants questioned whether the Trump administration could lawfully designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (“FTO”). In the days since they wrote that post, there has been some talk that the administration may go a different direction: Treasury Department targeted financial sanctions.