https://www.politico.com/news/2026/02/21/online-age-newsom-social-media-00791870California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s call to restrict kids’ access to social media is lending new bipartisan momentum to an effort that has surged in red states and foreign capitals — but has so far largely languished in Washington.By endorsing state legislation that would set age limits for teens on social media, the presumed 2028 Democratic presidential hopeful joins the ranks of Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz, GOP governors like Florida’s Ron DeSantis and leaders in countries including Australia, Canada, France and Malaysia who have either enacted, proposed or considered similar restrictions. Standing up such a law on Silicon Valley’s home turf would be an especially potent response to growing concerns by parents about social media’s impact on children’s mental health.Some conservative supporters of the restrictions say the emerging coalition on internet age-gating is filling a vacuum left by the Trump administration, which has largely declined to endorse the proposals. They see it as a missed opportunity for President Donald Trump, allowing politicians like Newsom to seize on populist outrage against the tech industry.Michael Toscano, director of the Family First Technology Initiative at the conservative Institute for Family Studies, said Trump’s relative disinterest has made the issue of online age restrictions “ripe for the taking” for ambitious rivals like Newsom.“Many of these ideas were pioneered by red states, and they were there for a Republican administration to take, with majorities in both houses,” Toscano said. “But instead, [the Trump administration] ignored their base and pushed industry priorities.”
Newsom’s plan joins a dizzying tangle of laws and proposals from states seeking to verify user ages online. Those restrictions have provoked questions about how they would work — details that could carry huge implications for people’s privacy and freedom from government snooping.Congress is mulling a clutch of kids’ online safety proposals, but is moving far more slowly than the states. Bills meant to restrict children’s access to social media or artificial intelligence chatbots face an uncertain future and have received virtually no support from Trump.Toscano griped that the White House was “crickets” on a recent proposal to regulate AI by Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), which included requirements for social media platforms to protect children. He also complained Trump “has not championed” the GUARD Act, a bipartisan bill requiring AI chatbots to verify users’ ages.Asked for comment, a White House spokesperson pointed to Trump’s December executive order to block state AI laws, which includes a call for Congress to pass an AI framework that would “ensure that children are protected.”Newsom first expressed support for so-called age-gating legislation Thursday in a policy position shared with POLITICO. His spokesperson Tara Gallegos said the proposal is inspired by Australia’s recent social media ban for kids under 16 years of age, though she said the governor’s position on an outright ban remains in flux.It was a rare case of the governor getting out ahead of Sacramento lawmakers, who recently floated legislation to restrict kids’ access to social media. And it appears to cut against recent moves by Newsom to work with tech companies, including on AI laws and more moderate approaches to age verification.
The idea of limiting kids’ access to platforms such as TikTok, Facebook and Instagram has spread rapidly around the world since Australia approved its ban in 2024. Before announcing his stance, Newsom met with leaders in both Australia and Spain, which is considering its own social media ban for kids.“Australia was the first sort of kickstart enforcing a ban, but there have been discussions in many countries about going this route,” said Alex Ambrose, a policy analyst at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, an industry-aligned think tank. “I think people saw the push in Australia and really capitalized on that moment. And so that’s why we’re seeing this real cascade of other countries doing their own bans.”International momentum is one factor in a recent surge of state laws and proposals to restrict kids’ access to online content.Much of that activity has centered around red states. Florida passed a bill in 2024 barring children younger than 14 from having a social media account, while restrictions Utah placed on kids’ social media use have been temporarily blocked in court. Lawmakers’ attempts in Texas and Alabama to ban social media for minors didn’t make it across the finish line.Texas, Utah, Louisiana and Alabama recently passed laws requiring mobile app stores and developers to verify users’ ages and get parental consent for each purchase. Some of those laws are being challenged by the tech lobby, and the issue is expected to wind up before the Supreme Court. Last year, Texas successfully defended a law requiring age verification to access porn sites.Laws out of blue states related to online age-gating have generally been less sweeping. Last year, legislators in Sacramento passed a bill forcing platforms to display health warning labels to users under 18, and another requiring device-makers to check user ages.
>we must give the social media companies our most private data to help protect the childrenThis is very UKpilled
>>1491339or just moderate the content. like none of it is necessary if you just don't allow porn
You should have to prove you're not an indian to go on the internet
A better solution would be to ban smartphone/tablet ownership for children, and bring back "dumb" phones. No kid needs a phone that does anything other than make calls and send text messages.Of course nobody would support this idea because then parents would have to find other ways to amuse their children than shoving an iPad into their hands and gen z and younger doesn't know how to use PCs anymore.
>>1491372That wouldn't give them the control they want.
>>1491333>be the only Dem in the only state that doesn't have retarded Verification ID laws >Throw that awayNewsom's goal is to lose the 2028 election, I can feel it.If anyone wanted Republican but gay and loves migrants then little Marco is right there. Democrats need a frontrunner that stand a against the shit that people hate, not cave and open their buttholes to palantir and AI companies.
>>1491339He's trying to do what Republicans are already doing now but shittier. It's retarded.A democrat solution to this would be to institute a national electronic ID that social media companies only get the secure hash code for, they never identify you personally, but instead get the hash. Instead we get the worst of all worlds with Republicans and now Democrats demanding everyone upload their face and put it in a Palantir database because little timmy might see a boobie (this does not stop little timmy and in fact makes everyone who uploads their face subject to data breaches, fraud, and thievery)
>>1491374Honestly this. Notice how the """"""'""""""'""""""'""""""'""""""'""""""'""""""'solution""""""'""""""'""""""'""""""'""""""'""""""'""""""' all of these neocons can do is give MORE data to social media companies when this is data they shouldn't have at all because they shouldn't be serving children in the first place? Literally justifying their business model of selling data.
where's the damn cat
