I also wonder if the tiktok ban is not enforceable. You can ban it from all app stores but it is not impossible to get apps for mobile devices from sources that are not app stores. There is also the concept of the punishment must fit the crime. Even if the tiktok ban survives all constitutional objections what punishment could you give for a thing that is still just in essence a harmless waste of time.

@NeilMeyer I doubt that even banning from app stores is feasible. Why would company not based in Montana and not having a primary business interest there care about Montana laws?

@Revolver_Ocelot in Florida if you kidnap a transgender child and bring them to Florida you have immunity from prosecution because the kidnapping is legal there... or something like that. Perhaps it works similarly with app store executives in Montana.

@user253751, kidnapping is legal in Florida? I highly doubt that…

@Revolver_Ocelot In general, if you do business in a state, you have to obey that state's laws. So an app store that allows customers from Montana to use it has to obey Montana's laws for those customers.

@Barmar or else what?

@user253751 They can fine you, for example.

@NeilMeyer The mechanics of the ban are problematic in multiple ways. EG Facebook serves up Tik Tok videos when viewing FB reels, and you can view Tik Tok videos from their website, without using an App. And that's not counting all the ways you can bypass the App store clause. The funniest comment I've seen about all of this was by a journalist who said that it looks like the bill was written after the lawmakers watched a couple of videos .. on Tik Tok.

Besides DMCA the CFAA and the Wire Fraud statutes are in the same area of legislation

@MichaelHall While the description is hyperbole, user253751 is not entirely wrong about the kidnapping of transgender children in Florida thing. The implicit reference is the S.B. 254 just passed in 2023. It allows Florida courts to temporarily make custody decisions for children in Florida who are receiving gender-affirming care if their custody order is from another state, but the state that made the original custody agreement has the final say. It also allows Florida courts to issue a warrant to take physical custody of a child who is receiving gender-affirming care. But this is off-topic.

@ohwilleke, I agree it's off topic, but I would actually say it IS "entirely wrong" to conflate state sponsored protective custody of children with kidnapping.

@MichaelHall The language is metaphorical, but it isn't "entirely wrong" to call a law that authorizes the state to take a child from the child's parent, possibly contrary to a state custody order from another state, for the lawful conduct of providing the child with gender-affirming care, "kidnapping."

@ohwilleke, Let's remove the progressive euphemism "gender affirming care" from the discussion and consider a young child who wanted to have their legs amputated below the knee and prosthetics installed after being inspired by the running exploits of Oscar Pistorius. Should the state have any say at all in protecting a child against custodians willing to allow them to make such a permanent and life altering decision, or would doing so be considered "kidnapping" by reasonable people?

@MichaelHall Gender-affirming care is not a euphemism. Transgender identity is a rare but very real and medically established fact. It is not analogous to your counter-example. And there are medically important reasons to do it young, because gender transition post-puberty can undo irreversible changes that happened that at that point The transgender animus is pure ignorance and hate driven policy.

@ohwilleke, Euphemism: "A mild or indirect word or expression substituted for one considered to be too harsh or blunt when referring to something unpleasant or embarrassing." Castrating underaged children in the name of "health care" IS a euphemism. Stating so is no more ignorant or hate driven than claiming that your counter opinion is driven by an evil, deviant progressive agenda bent on destroying existing societal norms.

@MichaelHall Please provide a citation for "Castrating underaged children". Words have meanings. And if you mean the use of puberty blockers, the you appear to not understand that their affects are reversible.

@PeterM, I understand that words have meanings, and I choose them carefully. If I meant puberty blocking medication I would have said so clearly. And I have given no indication that I do not understand that not taking such medication might result in puberty occurring naturally, so why would you presume I think otherwise? My question back to you is: Is surgery considered "gender affirming care"? If it is NOT, I will modify or delete earlier statements. If it is, then my point is valid and I don't know what sort of citation you are looking for...

MODERATORS: Please move this to discussion, I don't know how. Out of respect I would request that you do not delete it however.

@PeterM Meanwhile, I am will to accept that my presumption that transgender advocates don't have age limits may be incorrect, so if you could provide a citation showing that they are united in categorically opposing permanent surgical procedures until a child reaches some adult age of being able to provide informed consent, (presumably 18) then I will change my tune. Otherwise castration=surgery=healthcare unless proven otherwise. No citation needed, these are common terms with clearly understandable definitions and your request of me is unclear.

"But in Finland, Sweden, France, Norway, and the U.K., scientists and public-health officials are warning that these interventions may do more harm than good." --the Atlantic

@ohwilleke, I am confused by this: "gender transition post-puberty can undo irreversible changes". Is this a typo? Did you mean to say "cannot"? Because if you can undo something then it isn't irreversible. And what sort of changes are you referring to that cannot be reversed?

Yes. The point is that not doing makes it impossible to do later. You either have to do it early or do a puberty blocker until you do.