There's an old saying in Washington that the worst ideas are bipartisan. This bill doesn't just ban or force the divestiture of TikTok. It goes after what it calls foreign adversary-controlled applications. Then you get to the provision that I think is the most problematic, which is a person subject to the direction or control of a foreign person or entity.

The novel language here is where it says subject to the direction of. In my view, that's very vague. A creative attorney general could try to say, "Well, wait a second. If Elon has a major Tesla factory in Shanghai, is he subject to the direction of the Chinese Communist Party?" Because they could influence him, they could leverage him.

If Donald Trump is accused on virtually a daily basis of being a Russian asset, is he subject to the direction of Vladimir Putin? I don't know how anyone can look at this language and not say it's too vague. The bill poses a significant risk of being Patriot Act 2.0.