Re:Supreme Court rules to uphold TikTok ban, setting stage f...
by slt2021 on Friday January 17, 2025 @01:46PM
(#42741845)
Hart-Scott-Rodino Improvements Act requires FTC to approve all large M&A deals + DoJ needs to do antitrust review
https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance/competition-guidance/gui...
Re:Supreme Court rules to uphold TikTok ban, setting stage f...
by JumpCrisscross on Friday January 17, 2025 @02:17PM
(#42742155)
HSR is incredibly routine and politically insulated. It’s closer to a filing than actual review.
Re:Supreme Court rules to uphold TikTok ban, setting stage f...
by slt2021 on Friday January 17, 2025 @03:04PM
(#42742662)
except when the government decides to intervene and reject the transaction. See, this seems like routine, but ultimately it gives the government an option to cancel transaction they dont like and they can always cite some bogus reason like "national security" and use racist pretext like ethnicity of the CEO or whatever
Re:Supreme Court rules to uphold TikTok ban, setting stage f...
by JumpCrisscross on Saturday January 18, 2025 @01:22PM
(#42750226)
> it gives the government an option to cancel transaction they dont like
Delay. It’s not a deferential review.
Why?
> Political capital is needed because the tiktok question is politicized heavily (national security as a reason)
This is entirely meaningless. You don’t need political capital to maintain the status quo.
> Do you have a counter example?
To your hypothetical? My example is the law. FACA is tightly defined. Bytedance needs to divest to a non-FAC to return to the status quo. Trump could do something else to fuck with them. But that’s true of anyone anywhere.