Shulou(Shulou.com)06/01 Report--

Articles against Kaspersky

But Huawei is clearly calmer than Kaspersky

Kaspersky only defended his rights through legal litigation, and did not question the law itself.

This time Huawei found a more sufficient basis, and the reason was "unconstitutional", directly questioning the passed National Defense Authorization Law itself.

In terms of legal feasibility, the National Defense Authorization Act is a set of government decrees signed in 2018.

The only way to counter this set of government decrees that have been passed is for the Supreme Court to rule that the law is "unconstitutional."

But the Supreme Court's ruling on unconstitutionality is also the supreme and final ruling on a case.

This is destined to have a great impact on technology companies across the United States and even future legal norms once the US Supreme Court accepts the case.

Once Huawei loses, it will affect the enthusiasm of the entire US technology company.

This time Huawei mainly prosecuted several points in Article 889 of the National Defense Authorization Act:

Article 1.889 explicitly names Huawei and determines its connection with the Chinese government in the form of legislation.

This is a conclusion drawn without any basis whatsoever.

It directly violates the U.S. Constitution's definition of fairness and may constitute discrimination.

2. The other 889 Ordinances were passed on the basis of free riding with other Ordinances. Ordinances were passed without full discussion by the legislature.

This in itself violates the constitutional rules governing the legislative process.

In short, Huawei sued the regulation and related judicial unconstitutionality from many aspects such as the reasons and procedures of Article 889 law.

There are new reports that the court has issued a subpoena to the US government.

Huawei's lawsuit against the U.S. government is a counterattack since last year's U.S. global ban on Huawei.

Much of this stems from January, when the U.S. government sued Huawei executives without good reason.

And constantly through judicial and government relations, Huawei is suppressed.

Huawei has repeatedly reiterated that Huawei's operation is originally a pure corporate behavior.

However, the U.S. suppression of Huawei has no clear evidence from the beginning and is entirely based on speculation.

A number of companies have said they do not see Huawei as a threat to national security.

If Huawei wins, it will provide the most fundamental legal protection for foreign companies doing business in the United States.

It can also promote the development of Huawei 5G and Made in China in the United States and even around the world.

Welcome to subscribe "Shulou Technology Information " to get latest news, interesting things and hot topics in the IT industry, and controls the hottest and latest Internet news, technology news and IT industry trends.