Politics

Rahm Emanuel says U.S. should follow Australia’s youth social media ban

Published

2 months ago

December 9, 2025

Rahm Emanuel, who is mulling a presidential run, is pushing for the United States to follow Australia’s lead in banning children under 16 from most social media.

Alarmed by the addictive nature of social media apps and the attendant health and safety risks for young users, Emanuel wants to amp up public pressure on American lawmakers to restrict access to some of the world’s most popular platforms.

In a bit of irony, the potential 2028 White House hopeful plans to issue his call to action Tuesday, as Australia’s ban takes effect, in a video he’ll post on his social media accounts, according to plans the Democrat shared first with Blue Light News.

“We’ve got to make a choice when it comes to our adolescents: Who’s going to be a kind of moral guiding light? I put my thumb on the scale for adults over algorithms,” Emanuel said in an interview, accusing Big Tech of prioritizing profits over “protecting our adolescents.”

It’s the latest in a series of policy stances Emanuel is sharpening as the former ambassador, who worked for three Democratic presidents and was mayor of Chicago, calls out his party’s messaging from education to public safety ahead of a critical midterm election.

It also comes as Democrats are embracing social media influencers and encouraging political leaders and candidates to spend more time online to promote their messaging and reach younger voters.

But Emanuel sees those as separate issues — an electoral strategy targeted toward adults over 18 versus a public health problem affecting adolescents. He likened solving it to steps he took to curb youth smoking as mayor by raising the minimum age to buy tobacco products. And he suggested lawmakers should start with targeting three of the most popular apps among U.S. teens — TikTok, Instagram and Snapchat.

“We can’t lose another generation because of inaction or political gridlock,” he said.

Emanuel appears to be taking a tougher stance on youth access to social media than some of his would-be rivals for the Democratic nomination — and positioning himself against the Big Tech lobby that has fiercely opposed efforts to regulate who accesses their platforms by arguing it infringes upon free speech. As a candidate, he too received donations from tech giants, including Eric Schmidt and Sheryl Sandberg.

Asked about those contributions, he said his stance now shows his independence from those firms.

In California, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed bills this fall that require social media platforms to display health warning labels to minors and require apps to check kids’ ages. Both Newsom and his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, have spoken out about social media’s impact on kids’ mental health.

Maryland Gov. Wes Moore signed a “Kids Code” last year that aims to limit data tech companies can collect from children, but is mired in a legal battle. Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker signed a law in 2023 that works to ensure children are compensated for appearing in online content.

Emanuel, asked if his proposed social-media ban would be key to his platform should he run for president, said “anything that allows us to keep focus on improving academic standards and protecting our children on a public-health basis is going to be a priority.”

Australia’s world-first social media ban is designed to restrict access to major social media platforms including Facebook, Instagram, X, Snapchat, TikTok and YouTube for children under 16. And it threatens to slap their parent companies with tens of millions of dollars in fines if they don’t take “reasonable steps” to prevent youngsters’ access. Tech firms had protested the measure as rushed and “short-sighted” and argued it “will not fulfill its promise to make kids safer online.” But they have already begun deactivating accounts.

There’s some support for a similar ban in the U.S. Nearly six in 10 voters in a Quinnipiac University poll conducted in late 2024 said they would like to see similar age restrictions, though support was lower among those ages 18 to 34. An August POLITICO-Citrin Center-Possibility Lab poll of registered California voters showed 45 percent support for banning social media for kids under 16.

A bipartisan group of senators — including Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who political insiders think is positioning himself for another White House run in 2028 and who has made kids’ online safety a centerpiece of his stint chairing the panel that oversees social media — introduced a bill earlier this year that would ban children under age 13 from social media. Emanuel said that legislation has “the right thrust.”

Another bipartisan group of senators has reintroduced a bill that would require social media firms to remove features that could have negative effects on youth mental health. The bill sailed through the Senate 91-3 last year but stalled in the House, and the two chambers remain at odds over the details.

Amid congressional gridlock, a patchwork of primarily red states have passed laws attempting to limit kids’ access to social media by requiring parental consent and imposing digital curfews. But those efforts have drawn resistance from industry groups representing tech giants like Meta, Alphabet and Snapchat and have been largely blocked by courts.

Still, a divided panel of appeals judges last month gave Florida the go-ahead to begin enforcing a law signed by one-time presidential aspirant, GOP Gov. Ron DeSantis, that bars children under age 14 from using many social media platforms and requires parental approval for those ages 14 and 15. DeSantis, who might mount another White House bid in 2028, has hailed the law as a way of keeping children safe from online predators.

Emanuel acknowledged the stiff legal challenges a sweeping social media ban could face. But he said there’s a potentially “winning argument” in casting the crackdowns as combating “a public health issue associated with technology” rather than the technology itself.

Tyler Katzenberger, Andrew Atterbury and Shia Kapos contributed to this report.

Politics

Donald Trump’s unprecedented political war chest got even bigger in 2025

Published

9 hours ago

February 1, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Donald Trump’s political war chest grew dramatically in the second half of 2025, according to new campaign finance disclosures submitted late Saturday, giving him an unprecedented amount of money for a term-limited president to influence the midterms and beyond.

Trump raised $26 million through his joint fundraising committee in the back half of last year, and another $8 million directly into his leadership PAC. And a super PAC linked to him has more than $300 million in the bank.

All together, a web of campaign accounts, some of which he controls directly and others under the care of close allies, within the president’s orbit have $375 million in their coffers.

The funds far outstrip those of any other political figure — Republican or Democrat — entering 2026, and have no real historical precedent. And Trump could put them to use this year for the midterms, or to shape future elections, even as he cannot run for president again.

Trump continues to outpace any other Republican in raising money, both from large and small-dollar donors. His joint fundraising committee — Trump National Committee, which pools fundraising for a variety of Trump-aligned groups — accounted for 1 in 8 dollars raised on WinRed, the primary Republican online fundraising platform, during the second half of 2025, according to a Blue Light News analysis.

And no super PAC raised even half as much in 2025 as the $289 million from MAGA Inc., the Trump-aligned super PAC that both the president and Vice President J.D. Vance appeared at fundraisers for last year.

Trump has given few clues as to how he might put the funds to use. Trump National Committee primarily sends funds to the president’s leadership PAC, Never Surrender, with a bit of money also going to the Republican National Committee and Vance’s leadership PAC, Working For Ohio.

Candidates cannot use leadership PAC money for their own election efforts. But the accounts — which are common across Washington and have long been derided by anti-money in politics groups as “slush funds” — allow politicians to dole out money to allies or fund political travel.

Never Surrender spent $6.7 million from July through December, with more than half of that total going toward advertising, digital consulting and direct mail — expenses typically linked to fundraising.

So far, Trump’s groups have held their powder in Republican primaries. While Trump has endorsed against a handful of Republican incumbents now locked in competitive primaries — including Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana and Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky — and threatened others, he hasn’t used money. A super PAC targeting Massie, MAGA KY, is run by Trump allies but has largely been funded by GOP megadonor Paul Singer.

MAGA Inc.’s only election-related spending last year was to boost now-Rep. Matt Van Epps in the special election in Tennessee’s 7th District.

Trump’s massive war chest makes him a political force, independent of the traditional party infrastructure. The RNC — which derives a significant portion of its fundraising from Trump — had $95 million in the bank at the end of the year, roughly a quarter of what the Trump-linked groups have.

And their rivals at the Democratic National Committee are far worse off — at just over $14 million, while owing more than $17 million in debt.

Politics

Houston Democrat wins former Rep. Sylvester Turner’s seat ahead of contested primary

Published

10 hours ago

February 1, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Harris County Attorney Christian Menefee, a Democrat, won a special runoff election on Saturday to serve the remainder of former Texas Rep. Sylvester’s term, who died last year.

The Associated Press projected that Menefee beat Amanda Edwards, an attorney and former member of the Houston City council, after a protracted process to fill the central Houston seat after Turner’s death in March 2025. The process was drawn out by GOP Gov. Greg Abbott’s refusal to quickly schedule a special election following Turner’s death and a crowded field that triggered a runoff following the first round of voting in November.

But the contest between the pair will continue: Both Menefee, 37, and Edwards, 44, are participating in the March primary for a newly refashioned 18th Congressional District, going up against Rep. Al Green, 78. That winner will be heavily favored to win a full two-year term in November.

The March primary is the latest example of the generational change debate animating the Democratic Party, as the two young Democrats take on progressive icon Green, who has been in Congress for more than two decades. It’s a fight that’s taking place nationwide, pitting young and old factions of the party against each other as they both argue they’re better fighters against Republicans.

Residents in this district have been without consistent representation since former Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee died in 2024. Lee held the seat for three decades.

Green’s current district was scrambled by the Texas GOP’s redistricting, prompting him to jump into the race to represent a new district that contains many of his constituents.

Menefee’s victory is a huge boost to his public profile ahead of the primary. Early voting begins in two weeks.

Politics

Elon Musk pours millions more into helping Republicans keep Congress

Published

13 hours ago

February 1, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Tech mogul Elon Musk poured $10 million into two major Republican super PACs at the end of last year, according to campaign finance disclosures submitted Saturday, as he once again takes a more active role in GOP politics.

The Tesla and SpaceX CEO, who had a public falling out with President Donald Trump last spring and said he was giving up on political spending, gave $5 million in December to each of the Congressional Leadership Fund and Senate Leadership Fund, two groups that aim to help the GOP keep control of Congress this year.

It was Musk’s second round of donations to both groups this cycle, having previously given in June, amid his feud with Trump. Those contributions came shortly before Musk floated starting his own political party, an initiative that never seemed to gain much headway.

But Musk and Trump have patched up their differences more recently, with the tech CEO joining Trump for dinner at Mar-a-Lago earlier this month. Musk has also been back to advocating for Republican politics on X, which he owns, pushing for senators to pass a plussed up version of the SAVE Act, a bill that would require states to collect proof of citizenship from people registering to vote.

Musk has thrown his support behind a version called the SAVE Act Plus, calling for ID requirements and a ban of mail voting for most Americans along with other changes to election administration.

Musk was the biggest individual donor to political committees during the 2024 election cycle, spending roughly $290 million, mostly through his own super PAC, America PAC, in support of Trump.

In the first few months of the Trump administration, he played an active role with the Department of Government Efficiency, but began fighting with Trump and Republicans around the president’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Musk also threw himself into a Wisconsin Supreme Court election in April where his preferred candidate lost by 10 points.

Musk’s funds accounted for just a fraction of total fundraising for both SLF and CLF. SLF raised nearly $77 million in the final six months of 2025 and had $100 million cash on hand, while CLF raised over $38 million over that period and had more than $54 million cash on hand.