RESTRICT Act: Overly-Broad and Has Major Privacy and Free Speech Implications
March 28th, 2023Via: Reclaim the Net:
Observers note that if somebody or something is designated as a threat to national security, under the proposed legislation, the government would be given full access to these entities.
The text of the act singles out several usual suspects as foreign adversaries, such as Russia, China, Iran, etc., but, the director of national intelligence and the secretary of commerce are free to add new “foreign adversaries” to the list, while not under obligation to let Congress know about it.
They would also be given 15 days before notifying the president.
Critics make a point of the fact that US citizens marked as national security threat can also be considered and treated using the provisions of this proposal as “foreign individuals.”
And when this designation is in place, then the threat of “any action deemed necessary” to mitigate it kicks in, which could result in people being ordered to pay a million dollar fine, spend 20 years in prison, or lose all assets (and these forms of punishment would be meted out without due process).
No limits are put on the funding and hiring to enforce the act, and the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) would not apply.
All that just to “ban” TikTok?
Either way, The White House is in favor of passing RESTRICT Act.
It’s a funny ‘ol world, isn’t it, where the solutions to stated problems always involve more centralized control? Every. Single. Time.