European countries are being advised to lower gas storage filling targets and to start refilling gas stores early, as the conflict in Middle East drives up global energy prices. European Energy Commissioner Dan Jørgensen urged in a letter to national energy ministers, seen by POLITICO, that countries should be flexible in how they refill gas stores, to “help reduce the gas demand at times where the supply is tense and ease the pressure on gas prices in Europe.” Since the U.S. and Israel launched strikes on Tehran in late February, the ensuing conflict has caused global energy prices to spike, driven in part by Israeli strikes on Iran’s vast offshore gas field and Tehran’s effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a critical passage that facilitates a significant share of the world’s oil and natural gas trade. In the letter, Jørgensen asked EU countries to lower their gas storage refilling targets to 80 percent, 10 percentage points below normal targets. He also suggested that countries could start storage injections early to avoid an “end-of-summer rush to refill storages,” which would put upward pressure on prices. He also suggested that governments extend the deadline to meet filling targets to as late as December, two months later than usual. He said countries can take these measures under the EU Gas Storage Regulation, which provides for flexibility in difficult market conditions. The EU requires member countries to maintain gas reserves at 90 percent of capacity by the winter — a measure brought in after Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine. But this year’s colder-than-average winter depleted those reserves to an average of under 30 percent as of March, the lowest since 2022. Anxiety has been growing in Brussels over whether the conflict in Iran, coupled with already low gas reserves, could spark a fight among countries over dwindling global energy supplies. Jørgensen said that the EU’s gas supplies remain “relatively protected” since the bloc only has “limited reliance” on gas imports from the region. But as a “net importer” of gas globally, “high and volatile global prices may also impact the EU gas storage injections,” he said. As developments in Iran and the wider region are “are significantly impacting global oil and gas markets,” there are indications that it could take longer for Qatari gas production to return to pre-crisis levels, Jørgensen said. The commissioner said he would support countries to make use of the allowed flexibilities, which should be discussed with the European Commission and other member states before being implemented. A Commission spokesperson confirmed that the letter was sent to energy ministers.

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music From ChatGPT-written speeches to constituents flooding MPs with AI-generated emails, artificial intelligence has arrived in Westminster. In this episode of Westminster Insider, host Patrick Baker explores how politicians and ministers are scrambling to respond, balancing fears about deepfakes, bias and online harms with a determination to harness AI for economic growth. The UK’s first AI minister, Kanishka Narayan, says he believes that an artificial intelligence more capable than humans (so-called AGI) could arrive in five years’ time, and explains how he is trying to balance the risks of AI with its economic potential. Labour MP Mike Reader, dubbed the “ChatG-MP” after being spotted using the model to respond to constituents on a train, describes how AI is changing the day-to-day work of politicians. Conservative MP Luke Evans reflects on delivering the first AI-generated speech in the House of Commons. Labour MP Dawn Butler, who served on Parliament’s Science and Technology Committee, sets out her concerns about AI perpetuating racial discrimination and why she believes it must be tightly controlled. POLITICO’s Tech Editor Isobel Hamilton traces the twists and turns of the UK’s AI policy, including the influence of a pivotal meeting between the Prime Minister and a leading tech CEO. And Andrea Miotti, CEO of Control AI, explains why he believes urgent action is needed to guard against the existential risks posed by increasingly powerful systems.

BRUSSELS ― European governments are irritated over what they see as Ursula von der Leyen’s move to position herself as the EU’s chief representative abroad, saying that during the opening days of the U.S.-Israeli campaign against Iran she went beyond her mandate. In conversations with POLITICO, nine diplomats, EU officials and lawmakers, hailing from small and large European countries, criticized what they described as the European Commission president’s diplomatic overreach. Disapproval of her handling of the Iran crisis comes on top of carping about other foreign policy issues, including the Commission’s efforts to speed up Ukraine’s entry into the EU and von der Leyen’s approach to Donald Trump’s “Board of Peace.”   With the Middle East conflict entering its second week, the EU has struggled to speak with a common voice. Several governments are irked that von der Leyen seems to be playing the role the EU’s foreign affairs chief, Kaja Kallas ― meant to represent the 27 capitals ― should normally do. In the first days of the crisis, von der Leyen signaled support for regime change in Tehran and held no fewer than a dozen calls with EU and Gulf state leaders. She’s repeatedly staked out public positions that go well beyond the consensus between the bloc’s members, her critics said. “I felt I was hallucinating … watching Ursula von der Leyen call the heads of Gulf states,” said Nathalie Loiseau, a centrist French lawmaker on the European Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee. “She has no diplomatic service, speaks without a mandate or intelligence briefings. Her words have no value beyond her individual statement.” The role of coordinating the bloc’s foreign policy, the diplomats who spoke to POLITICO said, lies with Kallas, whose task it is to liaise with capitals and formulate a common position — even if that’s often a slow and painstaking process. Von der Leyen risks creating confusion in relations with the rest of the world, they said. “The problem is the president going out with ideas and somehow committing the European Union without consulting countries beforehand,” said a senior EU diplomat involved in foreign policy discussions and who, like others in this article, was granted anonymity to speak frankly about sensitive internal matters. “She is saying things that are not in her mandate.” These tensions will be in the background as von der Leyen and Kallas preside over a conference of EU ambassadors in Brussels today, where both are due to give keynote speeches. The Commission rejected the accusations, saying von der Leyen was carrying out her work as she should. She is demonstrating “political leadership of the Commission’s external policies” in line with the EU’s treaties, a Commission spokesperson said. “Outreach to other leaders worldwide is part and parcel of President von der Leyen’s responsibilities, be it bilaterally, multilaterally or in EU-led initiatives, such as the Global Gateway event,” designed to boost investment around the world, the spokesperson said. The EU’s formal position on the Iran war was not set out by von der Leyen but defined by Kallas in a statement coordinated with Europe’s 27 countries a week ago, according to the spokesperson. “The statement reflects the EU’s position on the matter,” the spokesperson said. EUROPE’S PRESIDENT? Von der Leyen’s evolution into the EU’s most powerful figure with a stature on a par with presidents and prime ministers has been nearly seven years in the making. The former German defense minister has led the EU through one crisis after another, from the Covid pandemic to Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine and trade disputes with U.S. President Trump. In many of those situations, EU leaders have expressed gratitude that she has stepped forward. “You rarely hear much criticism of von der Leyen when it comes to Ukraine,” said a diplomat. | Martin Bertrand/Hans Lucas/AFP via Getty Images “You rarely hear much criticism of von der Leyen when it comes to Ukraine,” said the diplomat from a mid-sized EU country. “That’s because most EU countries are aligned in their support of Ukraine and it’s almost seen as an internal matter.” Diplomats voiced support for the EU executive chief’s work as a crisis manager, praising her for coordinating support for Ukraine against Russia and managing tense commercial relations with the U.S. The difficulties have emerged on thorny Middle East politics or when the Commission’s position on EU expansion is felt as pressuring governments to agree before they’re ready. The diplomats who spoke to POLITICO argued that von der Leyen’s flurry of tweets and conversations with Gulf leaders did not formally represent EU foreign policy positions. Critics also voiced skepticism about what von der Leyen, who has no military means at her disposal and has no mandate to shape EU-wide foreign policy positions, could be offering Gulf states under missile and drone attack from Iran. “What exactly is she promising when she says we will support them?” asked Loiseau. “Who is ‘we’? For now, the support is the Charles de Gaulle [French aircraft carrier], Rafale jets in Abu Dhabi and defense agreements with some countries.” “What we’re seeing is role-play with nothing behind it,” said Loiseau, who belongs to French President Emmanuel Macron’s centrist party. Von der Leyen is a member of the center-right European People’s Party, along with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. A statement in which von der Leyen appeared to embrace a change of leadership in Iran proved particularly irksome to EU countries that lean closer to Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez’s highly critical stance toward the U.S.-Israeli airstrikes. EU countries are split over how to respond to the conflict. Despite reaching a consensus on a statement about the war on March 1, ten countries had advocated a more prominent invocation of international law during an emergency gathering of EU foreign ministers, two diplomats said. Some countries argue that von der Leyen’s statements don’t reflect that delicate balance. “We [Europe] are meant to be the beacon of international law,” said a fourth diplomat. “But now she has trapped us on regime change. Whose position is this? Not ours.” Gulf countries had been “grateful” for von der Leyen’s “proactive” outreach in recent days, the Commission spokesperson said. ‘THIS IS NOT WHAT WE WANT’ In Paris, it’s von der Leyen’s decision to send her commissioner for the Mediterranean, Dubravka Šuica, to the inaugural session of the Board of Peace ― the Trump-led body aimed at promoting global stability ― that irked most, leading to public criticism from French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot. The ruffled feathers were “predictable,” a fifth diplomat said.  Von der Leyen decided to send Dubravka Šuica to the inaugural session of the Board of Peace. | Dursun Aydemir/Anadolu via Getty Images “As we knew, Trump made no distinction between observers and full members [of the Board of Peace],” the diplomat said. “He displayed the EU flag along with others, suggesting that Europe supports this initiative. This is not what we want.” As if to underscore the divisions in Brussels, Kallas had been working to coordinate a joint position on the Board of Peace by texting the bloc’s foreign ministers and inviting them not to participate, the diplomat said. “This is what we expect” on foreign policy, the diplomat added. Defending Šuica’s participation, the Commission distanced itself from fully supporting the Trump body.  “The participation of Commissioner Šuica cannot be interpreted as amounting to an implicit endorsement of the Board of Peace by the Commission, let alone by the [European] Union, nor an endorsement of the outcome of the meeting or of any resolutions that might be adopted by the board members,” the Commission spokesperson said. One diplomat from a mid-sized EU country backed up that view. “On the Board of Peace, realistically the large majority of member states were fine with how this went,” the diplomat said. READING THE ROOM The way the Commission has pushed to expand the EU to new members has annoyed some capitals.  Marta Kos, the commissioner in charge of the topic, has floated a range of creative solutions, including an attempt to bring Ukraine into the bloc as early as 2027.  The ideas — shared during informal briefings rather than in written proposals — have irked governments, prompting them last week to push back during a dinner with von der Leyen’s powerful chief of staff, Bjoern Seibert. “This dinner was overdue,” said a EU diplomat from a large EU country. “We all want Ukraine to be anchored in the EU, but enlargement needs to be acceptable to member states. There is a process — we are reminding them of that.” “The Commission did not read the room on this one,” said the diplomat from a mid-sized EU country. At the dinner, diplomats told the Commission they wanted to retain a merit-based approach to EU enlargement and were not in favor of a Commission idea to allow countries like Ukraine to join while they are still working to meet the joining criteria, according to officials in the meeting. An EU official aware of von der Leyen’s thinking pushed back on the idea that her Commission had overstepped on enlargement, pointing out that the EU executive has not put forward any formal proposals on changing the EU’s approach.  Discomfort with von der Leyen’s foreign policy activity has led to barely concealed tensions with Kaja Kallas. | Frederick Florin/AFP via Getty Images Even so, it was the institution’s job to reflect on how procedures may be updated in light of geopolitical changes. “The world has changed dramatically” since those rules were created, said the official. DECIDING IT CONSCIOUSLY Diplomats who spoke to POLITICO for this article voiced support for the EU executive chief’s work as a crisis manager, praising her for coordinating support to Ukraine against Russia and managing tense commercial relations with the U.S. But discomfort with von der Leyen’s foreign policy activity has led to barely concealed tensions with Kallas — creating a need for a reckoning about who does what in the EU, several diplomats and officials said. “We need to decide whether we want an institutional change — whether we want to give more foreign policy functions to the Commission,” said Nacho Sánchez Amor, a Spanish European lawmaker from the Socialists and Democrats group. “If so, we need to think about it, examine it, and decide it consciously.” The Iran crisis, the push to get Ukraine into the bloc and the wider challenges prompted by Trump’s second term in the White House add to the sense of unease in some capitals. “There is a conversation to have about the competences” of the EU in foreign policy, a diplomat from a large country said. “Between the HRVP [High Representative Kallas], the Commission and the Council presidency, there is a risk of cacophony. There will be a time to discuss this in depth.” Max Griera contributed to this report.

LONDON — Keir Starmer wants the public to know he’s going to move fast and fix things.  Speaking to an audience of young people last month, the U.K. prime minister said that unlike the previous Conservative government, which took eight years to pass the country’s Online Safety Act, Labour will legislate fast enough to keep up with the breakneck speed of technological change and its associated harms.  “We’ve taken the powers to make sure we can act within months, not years,” he said.   His words came after the government decried Elon Musk’s X for allowing deepfaked nude images to flood its platform. “The action we took on Grok sent a clear message that no platform gets a free pass,” Starmer said.  Labour showcased its bold new approach last week, tabling two legislative amendments that seek to grant ministers sweeping powers to change the U.K.’s online safety regime without needing to pass primary legislation through Parliament — meaning MPs and peers would have next to no opportunity for scrutiny.  While Labour argues this is necessary to deal with the onslaught of online harms brought about by technology — particularly AI — digital rights activists and civil liberties campaigners fear executive overreach, and say Labour is confusing fast action for good policy, especially as it mulls the possibility of a social media ban for under-16s.  GOVERNMENT HANDS ITSELF NEW POWERS The first amendment, to the Crime and Policing Bill, would empower any senior government minister to amend the Online Safety Act near unilaterally for the purposes of “minimizing or mitigating the risks of harm to individuals” presented by illegal AI-generated content.   The second amendment, to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, looks to go even further, giving ministers the ability to alter any piece of primary legislation to restrict children’s access to “certain internet services.”   The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) has said it wants to act “at pace” in response to the findings of its consultation, the “key focus” of which is whether to ban social media for under-16s, a policy idea which has picked up momentum in multiple countries since Australia introduced a ban at the end of last year.  Amendments like those tabled this week are commonly referred to as Henry VIII clauses, which allow ministers to largely bypass Parliament. They are not entirely new: successive governments since the 1980s have increasingly relied on statutory instruments for lawmaking, according to the Institute for Government.   But such clauses bring problems that could last long after Starmer’s premiership. The government may have good intentions when it comes to online safety, but the measures proposed are “storing up trouble for years to come at a very worrying moment where anti-democratic parties [around the world] are gaining traction,” Anna Cardaso, policy and campaigns officer at civil liberties organisation Liberty told POLITICO.  “When you create a law, you have to think about what a future government could do with those powers. A future government might not be motivated purely by reducing harms to children, or might have a very different view of what counts as harm,” agreed James Baker, advocacy manager at digital rights organisation Open Rights Group.   Baker pointed to steps taken by the Trump administration in the U.S. to target websites hosting LGBTQ+ content and reproductive health advice.   There are also questions to be asked about proportionality under the Human Rights Act, he argued, not least because the evidence base on how children are affected by social media is muddy at best — a DSIT-commissioned study published in January found little high-quality evidence of a correlation between time spent on social media and poorer reported mental health, for example.   Although the government hopes its use of Henry VIII powers will speed things up, the move is vulnerable to challenge in the courts — not only from human rights campaigners concerned about the impact on privacy and freedom of expression, but also from tech companies navigating any new regulations.   “The inevitable consequence of such broad regulatory discretion is an explosion in litigation,” Oliver Carroll, legal director at law firm Bird & Bird, said.   ‘FIRE-FIGHTING’ The government has backed away from plans to introduce primary legislation dedicated to artificial intelligence, with ministers instead looking to regulate AI at the point of use on a sector-by-sector basis.   Primary legislation on AI would have allowed parliamentarians and other stakeholders to “debate and hammer out the fundamental principles and a framework of regulation,” Liberty’s Anna Carsado said. “But instead, they’ve dodged the hard thing, and they’re just firefighting emergency by emergency by statutory instrument.”   The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill amendment gets its first outing in the House of Commons today, where it stands a good chance of surviving thanks to Labour’s 158-seat majority. Both amendments will also have to pass the House of Lords, where they could meet more resistance.  DSIT did not respond when contacted by POLITICO for comment.  

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Der Krieg gegen das iranische Mullah-Regime legt eine tiefe außenpolitische Kluft in der AfD offen. Während die Parteispitze um Alice Weidel und Tino Chrupalla mit Warnungen vor Instabilität für manche Beobachter überraschend nah an die Rhetorik von Linkspartei und BSW rückt, regt sich in der Fraktion deutlicher Widerstand. Pauline von Pezold und Frederik Schindler liegen Chat-Nachrichten vor, die zeigen, wie unversöhnlich sich die Lager in der Nahost-Kontroverse gegenüberstehen. An anderer Stelle herrscht Erleichterung: Das Verwaltungsgericht Köln hat die Einstufung der AfD als „gesichert rechtsextremistisch“ vorerst gestoppt. Pauline und Frederik ordnen ein, was dieser Etappensieg für ein mögliches Parteiverbotsverfahren bedeutet. Zudem diskutieren sie, ob in der Partei bereits ein Strategiewechsel im Umgang mit Mitgliedern vom äußersten rechten Rand erkennbar ist. Und: Im mächtigen Landesverband in Nordrhein-Westfalen fliegen die Fetzen. Kurz vor dem Landesparteitag bekämpfen sich das Lager um Martin Vincentz und der Rechtsaußen-Flügel um Matthias Helferich mit voller Härte. Es geht um Vorwürfe der „Hitler-Fixierung“ und den nackten Kampf um die Macht in Düsseldorf. Wer gewinnt die Oberhand im wichtigsten AfD-Verband Deutschlands? „Inside AfD“ ist der POLITICO-Deutschland-Podcast über die umstrittenste Partei des Landes. Trotz Radikalisierung und Beobachtung durch den Verfassungsschutz wächst die AfD weiter. Wie ist das möglich? Was treibt ihre Anhänger, Strategen und Gegner an? Wie funktioniert das Innenleben der Partei? Und was bedeutet ihr Aufstieg für das politische System Deutschlands? Antworten liefern immer mittwochs ⁠Pauline von Pezold⁠ von POLITICO und ⁠Frederik Schindler⁠ von WELT — unaufgeregt, aber kritisch. Fragen und Feedback gern an ⁠insideafd@politico.eu⁠. POLITICO Deutschland – ein Angebot der Axel Springer Deutschland GmbH Axel-Springer-Straße 65, 10888 Berlin Tel: +49 (30) 2591 0 ⁠information@axelspringer.de⁠ Sitz: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 196159 B USt-IdNr: DE 214 852 390 Geschäftsführer: Carolin Hulshoff Pol, Mathias Sanchez Luna

SACRAMENTO, California — In the end, Gavin Newsom named Arnold Schwarzenegger to the California Hall of Fame — though it took longer than the Arnold-verse expected. Newsom announced Schwarzenegger’s induction, along with eight others who “represent the best of the California spirit,” on Tuesday, about six months after Schwarzenegger’s name was conspicuously absent from an early list of inductees the governor previewed at a reception. To alumni of the former Republican governor’s administration who had anticipated he would be honored, last summer’s omission raised questions about whether it was influenced by Schwarzenegger’s opposition to Newsom’s redistricting gambit. Schwarzenegger, who created the Hall of Fame when he was in office, vocally opposed the effort. Voters ultimately approved Newsom’s redistricting plan in a November special election. Now months later, Newsom praised Schwarzenegger in a statement as a “singular figure in California history,” saying he embodies “the Golden State’s promise of opportunity.” “From humble beginnings, he built himself into a world champion bodybuilder, Hollywood icon, successful businessman, environmentalist, philanthropist, bestselling author, and the 38th Governor of California,” Newsom said. Other notable inductees include Hollywood star and humanitarian Jamie Lee Curtis, distance swimmer and LA28 chief athletic officer Janet Evans and chef Nobuyuki Matsuhisa, who co-founded the Nobu restaurant empire.

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Droht ein neuer Handelskrieg zwischen der EU und den USA? Nachdem der Supreme Court zentrale US-Zölle für rechtswidrig erklärt hat, steht der sogenannte 15-Prozent-Deal zwischen Brüssel und Washington erneut auf der Kippe. Joana Lehner und Jürgen Klöckner besprechen, warum ein Plan B zum bisherigen Deal keine Option ist. Im Policy Talk spricht Evonik-Vorstandsmitglied und Interims-CFO Claus Rettig über die Folgen der US-Zölle für die Chemieindustrie, wie sie sich an einer Stelle positiv auswirken und warum er nicht an eine Neuverhandlung des Zoll-Deals zwischen der EU und den USA glaubt. Außerdem geht es mit Rettig auch um die China-Reise von Friedrich Merz. Außerdem berichtet ⁠Gordon Repinski⁠, der den Kanzler in China begleitet, wie der dort wirtschaftliche Kooperation stärker in den Vordergrund rückt. Trotz Kritik an unfairem Wettbewerb und wachsendem Handelsbilanzdefizit. „Power & Policy“ zeigt jede Woche, wo und wie die Entscheidungen in der Wirtschaftspolitik fallen. ⁠Jürgen Klöckner⁠ und ⁠Joana Lehner⁠ von POLITICO sprechen mit Top-Entscheidern und liefern Off-the-Record-Einblicke aus der Redaktion und Machtzentren. Präzise Analysen, lange bevor Gesetze beschlossen sind. Der Podcast für alle in Wirtschaft und Politik, die einen Wissensvorsprung brauchen — immer donnerstags. Für Policy-Profis: Abonnieren und die Pro-Newsletter ⁠Industrie & Handel⁠, ⁠Energie & Klima ⁠und ⁠Gesundheit⁠. Jetzt kostenlos testen. Fragen und Feedback gern an ⁠powerandpolicy@politico.eu⁠ **(Anzeige) Eine Nachricht von Fuchs & Cie.: Bei Fuchs & Cie. zählen Leistung und Erfolg. Im Interesse unserer Klienten und ihrer Themen. Deswegen jetzt bewerben. Gerne mit einem Hintergrund aus den Bereichen Defence, Finance, Data oder Energy. Bewerbung per Mail an karriere@fuchs-cie.de. Wir verstärken unsere Teams in Berlin, München und Frankfurt.** POLITICO Deutschland – ein Angebot der Axel Springer Deutschland GmbH Axel-Springer-Straße 65, 10888 Berlin Tel: +49 (30) 2591 0 ⁠information@axelspringer.de⁠ Sitz: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 196159 B USt-IdNr: DE 214 852 390 Geschäftsführer: Carolin Hulshoff Pol, Mathias Sanchez Luna

A senior U.S. diplomat blasted German authorities over a police investigation into a retired man who referred to Chancellor Friedrich Merz as “Pinocchio.” “It isn’t just Holocaust denial that spurs police crackdowns in Germany. This criminal investigation (against a retiree over the term ‘Pinocchio’) feels like a case of lèse-majesté,” U.S. Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy Sarah Rogers said. “Most Germans I’ve talked to don’t want their laws applied this way. But vague, broad prohibitions on speech invariably produce edge-case abuses and chilling effects.” Rogers’ intervention underscores the Trump administration’s increasingly confrontational stance toward European policies on what people can and can’t say online, which it views as incompatible with U.S. free speech principles. Local media reported Friday that police were investigating a retiree from the southwestern city of Heilbronn who commented on a local police Facebook post last October about security measures for a Merz visit: “Pinocchio is coming to Heilbronn.” The man followed the comment with a long-nose emoji, referencing the fairytale character whose nose grows when he lies. Heilbronn police confirmed the probe to POLITICO. According to a spokesperson, the department’s social media team filtered all comments on their Facebook post for possible indictable insults and sent them to the city’s public prosecutor’s office. Three months later, police informed the man that he was under investigation over the alleged insult under Paragraph 188 of Germany’s criminal code. That provision allows prison sentences of up to five years for insult, slander or defamation directed at political figures. Paragraph 188 has previously sparked controversy in Germany. In 2024, police searched the home of a retiree who had called then-Economy Minister Robert Habeck Schwachkopf, or moron. The far-right AfD sought to abolish the paragraph in January, but a vote in the Bundestag failed. This wasn’t the first time Merz was referred to as “Pinocchio.” Green politician Franziska Brantner wrote in a Facebook post last summer that, if Merz was not going to reduce the energy tax as promised, he could become a “lying Pinocchio chancellor.” AfD lawmaker Stephan Brandner also compared Merz to the fictional character in a social media post. Regarding the newly reported probe, which comes as the Trump administration ramps up its attempts to force Europe into scaling back content-moderation laws, Rogers added: “When you’re regulating speech at scale, on platforms based in America (whose American users, especially, deserve First Amendment protection), this creates problems worth solving.”

SACRAMENTO, California — California Gov. Gavin Newsom stepped into the fight over age limits on social media Thursday, saying he wants state legislation that would restrict access to the powerful online platforms for teens under 16. In a policy position shared first with POLITICO, Newsom spokesperson Tara Gallegos said that the Democratic governor supports passing age-gating rules inspired by those Australia began enforcing last year, which bar teens under 16 from having social media accounts. Her comments came minutes after Newsom told reporters that “we have to address this issue” of teenagers’ chronic use of social media. “We need help. I think it’s long overdue that we’re having the debate,” Newsom said, when asked about age-gating during a press conference near San Francisco. “It is something that I’m very grateful that we are debating and pursuing at the state level.” With his remarks, the governor moved a step ahead of a bipartisan group of state lawmakers who this month introduced legislation that calls for “a minimum age requirement to open or maintain a social media account.” His comments mark a notable break from the governor’s typical reluctance to weigh in on pending legislation before it reaches his desk. Lawmakers are debating the age limit to include in the legislation. The bill’s lead author, Long Beach Democrat Josh Lowenthal, previously said he’s leaning toward setting the cutoff at 16. In staking out his position, Newsom joins a growing group of high-profile politicians arguing for the need to restrict access to Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok and other social media platforms that draw billions of daily users and have upended how people interact. The call for age limits has gained momentum since Australia put its ban in place, citing a growing body of research that the platforms can be addictive and harmful to teens’ mental health. When asked whether the governor would specifically support an outright ban on social media accounts for teens under 16 — as Australia has done — Gallegos said that was still in flux. Newsom’s comments Thursday follow recent overseas trips he made to the World Economic Forum in Switzerland and the Munich Security Conference. The governor said he directly discussed social media age limits in meetings with world leaders, including Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez. Spain and Malaysia are exploring Australia-style bans, while officials in France, Denmark and Italy are mulling a ban for kids under 15. On Wednesday, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz signaled he may back a proposal to restrict access for kids under 14 — an idea that’s gained steam back in the U.S., where bipartisan members of Congress are pushing a 13-and-under ban. Newsom previously touched on the issue during his State of the State address in January, in which he called on state lawmakers to explore stronger youth social media controls. During the speech, he questioned if California could “do more” following Australia’s social media ban. Even with the governor’s support, proposals to legally cut off teens’ access to social media are likely to spark fierce pushback from tech giants. Google, TikTok and Meta, which owns Facebook, are currently suing to block a 2024 state law that requires parental consent before minors view personalized content feeds, arguing it infringes on free speech. Tech industry group NetChoice, which lists Meta, Google and TikTok as members, has also indicated it may challenge two California social media laws passed last year: one requiring platforms to show minors health warning labels, and another requiring device-makers like Apple and Google to collect user ages. The same group of state lawmakers behind California’s age-gating bill also recently introduced legislation that would create an independent “eSafety Commission” to enforce digital platform regulations, modeled on a similarly named Australian agency. Newsom has not said whether he supports the measure.

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Seit rund zehn Monaten ist der ehemalige Top-Manager Karsten Wildberger Digitalminister in der Bundesregierung. Er soll Deutschland modernisieren, entbürokratisieren und digitalisieren. Gemeinsam mit Kanzler Friedrich Merz verfolgt er das Ziel, Deutschland zur KI-Nation zu machen. Joana Lehner und Jürgen Klöckner sprechen über diese Strategie für Künstliche Intelligenz. Wildberger steht für einen neuen Stil: den Versuch, ein Ministerium wie ein Unternehmen zu führen. Wo ist er damit erfolgreich und wo droht er zu scheitern? Joana und Jürgen analysieren auch, was der Digitalminister bereits erreicht hat und wo Reformen weiterhin nur schleppend vorangehen. Ein weiterer Schwerpunkt ist der AI Summit in Indien. Wildberger ist Deutschlands Vertreter bei der internationalen Konferenz mit zahlreichen Politikern, Wirtschaftsvertretern und bis zu 250.000 erwarteten Besuchern. Teil der deutschen Delegation ist auch DeepL-CEO Jarosław Kutyłowski. Er hat den Online-Übersetzungsdienst zu einer Milliardenbewertung geführt. Von Neu-Delhi aus spricht er im Policy Talk über seine Diskussionen mit dem Digitalminister, über Rechenzentren außerhalb Deutschlands und darüber, warum er die großen KI-Konkurrenten aus den USA nicht fürchtet. Wie Wildberger in Indien empfangen wird, was er dort erreichen kann und wie sich der Minister gibt, wenn Kameras und Mikrofone aus sind, berichtet zudem Larissa Kögl vom neuen POLITICO Pro Technologie-Newsletter. Das Policy-Briefing für die digitale Macht von morgen startet in diesem April. ⁠Den exklusiven Testzugang gibt es hier.⁠ „Power & Policy“ zeigt jede Woche, wo und wie die Entscheidungen in der Wirtschaftspolitik fallen. ⁠Jürgen Klöckner⁠ und ⁠Joana Lehner⁠ von POLITICO sprechen mit Top-Entscheidern und liefern Off-the-Record-Einblicke aus der Redaktion und Machtzentren. Präzise Analysen, lange bevor Gesetze beschlossen sind. Der Podcast für alle in Wirtschaft und Politik, die einen Wissensvorsprung brauchen — immer donnerstags. Für Policy-Profis: Abonnieren und die Pro-Newsletter ⁠Industrie & Handel⁠, ⁠Energie & Klima ⁠und ⁠Gesundheit⁠. Jetzt kostenlos testen. Fragen und Feedback gern an ⁠powerandpolicy@politico.eu⁠ **(Anzeige) Eine Nachricht von Fuchs & Cie.: Bei Fuchs & Cie. zählen Leistung und Erfolg. Im Interesse unserer Klienten und ihrer Themen. Deswegen jetzt bewerben. Gerne mit einem Hintergrund aus den Bereichen Defence, Finance, Data oder Energy. Bewerbung per Mail an karriere@fuchs-cie.de. Wir verstärken unsere Teams in Berlin, München und Frankfurt.** POLITICO Deutschland – ein Angebot der Axel Springer Deutschland GmbH Axel-Springer-Straße 65, 10888 Berlin Tel: +49 (30) 2591 0 ⁠information@axelspringer.de⁠ Sitz: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 196159 B USt-IdNr: DE 214 852 390 Geschäftsführer: Carolin Hulshoff Pol, Mathias Sanchez Luna