Politics

Meet the TikTok employee taking on Trump’s executive order

Patrick Ryan is raising money to file a lawsuit against a recent executive order that he says could prohibit all TikTok employees in the U.S. from getting paid.

TikTok's offices

Patrick Ryan is raising money for a legal suit against the Trump administration.

Photo: Chris Delmas/AFP via Getty Images

In March, Patrick Ryan left his position of nine years at Google to take a job as a technical program manager at TikTok. Five months later, Ryan is preparing to file a lawsuit against the Trump administration, fighting for his right to keep that job.

On Tuesday night, Ryan launched a GoFundMe campaign to raise money for a legal battle over the Trump administration's recent executive order, which prohibits "any transaction by any person" with TikTok owner ByteDance beginning Sept. 20. Ryan, who describes himself as a "recovering lawyer," argues that such an order would prohibit his employer from paying him and more than 1,400 other TikTok U.S. employees, thereby violating his constitutional right to due process.

"I have to take care of my family obligations, and I work with people, and I'm hiring people that I feel a sense of responsibility for," Ryan told Protocol. He said the idea that the entire company, not just the app, would get shut down was "not a scenario I anticipated."

When President Trump first announced his public plans to shut down TikTok, Ryan said, he and other staffers assumed that a ban — if indeed there was a ban — would only affect the app itself. It would be an undesirable outcome, but Ryan figured it would still enable employees to remain on the payroll while TikTok's leadership plotted their next move, which could include a sale to Microsoft. The company has announced its interest in buying TikTok pending a security review. In India, where the app is currently banned along with other Chinese apps, TikTok's 2,000 employees are still getting paid.

But as soon as he read the executive order, Ryan said he understood it could have more far-reaching implications for TikTok's U.S. employees, many of whom just started at the company thanks to a recent hiring spree, during which the company nearly tripled its U.S. footprint in a matter of months. Ryan said he began talking with his colleagues, including those on high skilled H-1B visas, whose ability to stay in the country is contingent on their employment. "I'm very concerned about what my colleagues are facing," Ryan said. "It's a real existential problem for them."

So, after informing TikTok and against the advice of his own friends and family, Ryan said he decided to pursue a case and began working with his friend Mike Godwin, a prominent attorney who's worked at the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the Wikimedia Foundation, and is best known for coining the eponymous internet adage Godwin's law.

Godwin told Protocol that he and Ryan's other lawyers at the firm Blackstone Law are still working out their case, but that their primary claim addresses the fact that the executive order would effectively take TikTok employees' property — in this case, their paychecks — without due process. "Due process requires that everyone with standing to make a claim gets a chance to be heard before their interest gets taken away," Godwin said.

TikTok's head of communications Josh Gartner said the company has "no involvement with and [is] not coordinating on" Ryan's case, which he's undertaken outside of work. "We respect the rights of employees to engage in concerted activity to seek due process of law," Ryan said.

In the company's public statement on the executive order, it made a similar claim about the lack of due process and said it would also "pursue all remedies" including through the U.S. courts. "We are shocked by the recent executive order, which was issued without any due process," the statement reads. "For nearly a year, we have sought to engage with the U.S. government in good faith to provide a constructive solution to the concerns that have been expressed. What we encountered instead was that the administration paid no attention to facts, dictated terms of an agreement without going through standard legal processes, and tried to insert itself into negotiations between private businesses."

It's unclear how Ryan's argument — or TikTok's — would be balanced against the right of the president of the United States to act in what he claims are the national security interests of the country. In the order, the president invoked the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, and, in doing so, assumed expansive powers to prohibit transactions with TikTok and ByteDance.

According to James Andrew Lewis, director of the technology policy program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, challenges to the IEEPA rarely work. He called Ryan's approach "delusional."

"The courts usually defer to the executive branch on matters of national security," Lewis said. "In any case, any ban doesn't go into effect for another five weeks, so they haven't actually been prevented from being paid. Even if you found a judge who didn't like Trump, the [Department of Justice] would appeal and win at the next level up."

Lewis said that if TikTok does, in fact, sue, it will likely be on First Amendment grounds, "not this."

Godwin acknowledged that the case is "not a sure thing" but argued that it's not a "crazy idea," either. "There's never been a case quite like this before," Godwin said.

The GoFundMe page is seeking to raise $30,000, and in less than two days, it's already raised more than $9,000. Some of that, Ryan said, comes from TikTok employees.

The secretary of commerce still has time to specify what, exactly, the order means by "transactions," and could very well exempt payroll from that list. But in the meantime, Godwin said, TikTok employees are wracked by uncertainty. "It's been a bit of a rollercoaster, and it's been astonishingly stressful for him and other employees," he said.

Ryan, for one, said he would be satisfied if the administration made a clarification to accommodate TikTok's U.S. staff. "That's the only thing we're asking for," he said, noting that he doesn't plan on seeking damages. But if it is really the government's intention to put TikTok out of business if it doesn't find a buyer by Sept. 20, Ryan said, "We're going to have to go to court and fight this thing."

This story has been updated to include comment from TikTok.

Power

How the creators of Spligate built gaming’s newest unicorn

1047 Games is now valued at $1.5 billion after three rounds of funding since May.

1047 Games' Splitgate amassed 13 million downloads when its beta launched in July.

Image: 1047 Games

The creators of Splitgate had a problem. Their new free-to-play video game, a take on the legendary arena shooter Halo with a teleportation twist borrowed from Valve's Portal, was gaining steam during its open beta period in July. But it was happening too quickly.

Splitgate was growing so fast and unexpectedly that the entire game was starting to break, as the servers supporting the game began to, figuratively speaking, melt down. The game went from fewer than 1,000 people playing it at any given moment in time to suddenly having tens of thousands of concurrent players. Then it grew to hundreds of thousands of players, all trying to log in and play at once across PlayStation, Xbox and PC.

Keep Reading Show less
Nick Statt
Nick Statt is Protocol's video game reporter. Prior to joining Protocol, he was news editor at The Verge covering the gaming industry, mobile apps and antitrust out of San Francisco, in addition to managing coverage of Silicon Valley tech giants and startups. He now resides in Rochester, New York, home of the garbage plate and, completely coincidentally, the World Video Game Hall of Fame. He can be reached at nstatt@protocol.com.

While it's easy to get lost in the operational and technical side of a transaction, it's important to remember the third component of a payment. That is, the human behind the screen.

Over the last two years, many retailers have seen the benefit of investing in new, flexible payments. Ones that reflect the changing lifestyles of younger spenders, who are increasingly holding onto their cash — despite reports to the contrary. This means it's more important than ever for merchants to take note of the latest payment innovations so they can tap into the savings of the COVID-19 generation.

Keep Reading Show less
Antoine Nougue,Checkout.com

Antoine Nougue is Head of Europe at Checkout.com. He works with ambitious enterprise businesses to help them scale and grow their operations through payment processing services. He is responsible for leading the European sales, customer success, engineering & implementation teams and is based out of London, U.K.

Protocol | Policy

Why Twitch’s 'hate raid' lawsuit isn’t just about Twitch

When is it OK for tech companies to unmask their anonymous users? And when should a violation of terms of service get someone sued?

The case Twitch is bringing against two hate raiders is hardly black and white.

Photo: Caspar Camille Rubin/Unsplash

It isn't hard to figure out who the bad guys are in Twitch's latest lawsuit against two of its users. On one side are two anonymous "hate raiders" who have been allegedly bombarding the gaming platform with abhorrent attacks on Black and LGBTQ+ users, using armies of bots to do it. On the other side is Twitch, a company that, for all the lumps it's taken for ignoring harassment on its platform, is finally standing up to protect its users against persistent violators whom it's been unable to stop any other way.

But the case Twitch is bringing against these hate raiders is hardly black and white. For starters, the plaintiff here isn't an aggrieved user suing another user for defamation on the platform. The plaintiff is the platform itself. Complicating matters more is the fact that, according to a spokesperson, at least part of Twitch's goal in the case is to "shed light on the identity of the individuals behind these attacks," raising complicated questions about when tech companies should be able to use the courts to unmask their own anonymous users and, just as critically, when they should be able to actually sue them for violating their speech policies.

Keep Reading Show less
Issie Lapowsky

Issie Lapowsky ( @issielapowsky) is Protocol's chief correspondent, covering the intersection of technology, politics, and national affairs. She also oversees Protocol's fellowship program. Previously, she was a senior writer at Wired, where she covered the 2016 election and the Facebook beat in its aftermath. Prior to that, Issie worked as a staff writer for Inc. magazine, writing about small business and entrepreneurship. She has also worked as an on-air contributor for CBS News and taught a graduate-level course at New York University's Center for Publishing on how tech giants have affected publishing.

Protocol | Workplace

Remote work is here to stay. Here are the cybersecurity risks.

Phishing and ransomware are on the rise. Is your remote workforce prepared?

Before your company institutes work-from-home-forever plans, you need to ensure that your workforce is prepared to face the cybersecurity implications of long-term remote work.

Photo: Stefan Wermuth/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The delta variant continues to dash or delay return-to-work plans, but before your company institutes work-from-home-forever plans, you need to ensure that your workforce is prepared to face the cybersecurity implications of long-term remote work.

So far in 2021, CrowdStrike has already observed over 1,400 "big game hunting" ransomware incidents and $180 million in ransom demands averaging over $5 million each. That's due in part to the "expanded attack surface that work-from-home creates," according to CTO Michael Sentonas.

Keep Reading Show less
Michelle Ma
Michelle Ma (@himichellema) is a reporter at Protocol, where she writes about management, leadership and workplace issues in tech. Previously, she was a news editor of live journalism and special coverage for The Wall Street Journal. Prior to that, she worked as a staff writer at Wirecutter. She can be reached at mma@protocol.com.
Protocol | Fintech

When COVID rocked the insurance market, this startup saw opportunity

Ethos has outraised and outmarketed the competition in selling life insurance directly online — but there's still an $887 billion industry to transform.

Life insurance has been slow to change.

Image: courtneyk/Getty Images

Peter Colis cited a striking statistic that he said led him to launch a life insurance startup: One in twenty children will lose a parent before they turn 15.

"No one ever thinks that will happen to them, but that's the statistics," the co-CEO and co-founder of Ethos told Protocol. "If it's a breadwinning parent, the majority of those families will go bankrupt immediately, within three months. Life insurance elegantly solves this problem."

Keep Reading Show less
Benjamin Pimentel

Benjamin Pimentel ( @benpimentel) covers fintech from San Francisco. He has reported on many of the biggest tech stories over the past 20 years for the San Francisco Chronicle, Dow Jones MarketWatch and Business Insider, from the dot-com crash, the rise of cloud computing, social networking and AI to the impact of the Great Recession and the COVID crisis on Silicon Valley and beyond. He can be reached at bpimentel@protocol.com or via Signal at (510)731-8429.

Latest Stories