TikTok, a video-sharing app, hosts about 1.5 billion users worldwide and is both loved and hated for its ability to create overnight celebrities and trends. Its cultural impact is undeniable; for better or worse, the app is a favorite platform for the expression of many online content creators.

TikTok has drawn bipartisan scrutiny because of its parent company Bytedance, which is based in Beijing and has alleged ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Lawmakers are suspicious of ways the CP (CCP) could use Bytedance/TikTok to gather sensitive data about American citizens and influence the app’s users.

The U.S. House of Representatives passed a measure last Wednesday to ban TikTok unless the app is sold to a different company that is not controlled by a “foreign adversary.” The bill, “Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act,” effectively provides two options: forced divestment (which is basically a sale) of the app away from a Chinese company or face a ban of the app in the United States.

The bill raises a number of important questions surrounding data privacy and the precedent that such a law would establish.

Members of Congress have cited national security concerns. They argue that TikTok, in its current form, has the potential to increase CCP influence and violate privacy rights. The app gathers and analyzes users’ data to customize what they see and what ads to show them—just like many other apps and products available to American consumers. That’s how they work, though all should face questions as to how they safeguard users’ personal information. Given this, it’s surprising why only TikTok appears to be raising concerns.

And if protecting American data is the concern, how does merely forcing a change in ownership prevent data breaches and advance cybersecurity? If federal or state agencies are concerned about data exposure on government devices, then they can (and do) prohibit government employees from installing apps on them. But that’s a very different policy than telling the American people what they can and cannot use in a global marketplace.

Expanding the government’s powers to force divestitures or outright ban companies just because they wish they had a different owner is a dangerous move. The United States is a country where individual liberties matter, where consumer interests drive the market, and where innovation and digital spaces are allowed to flourish under the protection of a nation that values civic engagement and free expression.

As the Senate considers this bill, they would be wise to question exactly what it would do relative to the problem identified, and carefully consider the precedent that will be created to expand the government’s reach going forward. It’s TikTok today, but could be any American or global company tomorrow.