Axios

Left-wing activists are demanding that prospective 2028 presidential contenders embrace a wealth tax — a move that many mainstream Democrats say is ill-advised.

Why it matters: On one side, potential White House hopefuls such as New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen and California Rep. Ro Khanna have endorsed wealth taxes.

Some top Democrats are quietly debating a fraught question: whether the party's best bet for winning back the presidency in 2028 is to nominate a man — perhaps a straight, white, Christian man.

• Their fear, divulged with dismay in group chats, at cocktail parties and increasingly in public, is that parts of the electorate are too biased to support a woman or other diverse candidate for president.
• Former first lady Michelle Obama fueled such talk recently, saying the U.S. is "not ready for a woman." Democratic strategists have put it bluntly, with several saying a version of "It has to be a white guy."

The big picture: The Democratic Party takes pride in being a champion of women, people of color, the LGBTQ+ community and religious minorities. Electing Barack Obama, the nation's first Black president, was the high point for the party's goal of boosting diversity in the executive branch.

A new pro-AI political operation is jumping into this year's midterms with a plan to spend more than $100 million, the latest push by a big-money group to promote a deregulation agenda.

• The group, dubbed Innovation Council Action, has the blessing of tech mogul and Trump AI adviser David Sacks. It's distinct from other pro-industry groups in that it's focused on boosting President Trump's priorities.

Why it matters: The AI lobby is on course to be a colossal player in the 2026 elections — bankrolling allies who advocate for deregulation and punishing critics who support tighter rules.

Top AI and government officials tell Axios CEO Jim VandeHei that Anthropic, OpenAI and other tech giants will soon release new models that are scary good at hacking sophisticated systems at scale.

The one to watch: Anthropic is privately warning top government officials that its not-yet-released model — currently branded "Mythos" — makes large-scale cyberattacks much more likely in 2026.

More than 5 million voting-age Americans would have to drive an estimated hour or more to present their citizenship documents to register to vote, as would be required under the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act.

Why it matters: President Trump is pushing the SAVE Act as necessary to secure future elections, but it could complicate voting for many American citizens.

Without a federal law, surrogacy in the U.S. is governed by a patchwork of state regulations/

Why it matters: Confusing, varied local rules can determine everything from whether agreements are legally binding to who is recognized as a parent at birth.

More Americans are turning to surrogacy to build their families, as the practice becomes more common and more publicly discussed.

Why it matters: As surrogacy becomes more visible and accessible, ethical, legal and cultural tensions become harder to ignore.

Americans desperately want day-to-day life to be more affordable. Right now, they aren't getting it.

The big picture: The pinch of high prices for food, energy, housing and more has driven seismic shifts in public opinion over the last four years. Since the onset of the Iran war, the cost of living looks likely to get worse, not better, at least in the near term.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.) shared insight into his relationships with some of the Democratic Party's biggest names in a new wide-ranging interview on "The Axios Show."

Why it matters: Newsom, a potential presidential candidate for 2028, bluntly shared conversations he's had with Democratic former presidents or presidential nominees of the last decade.

The House on Friday night passed a bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security until May 22.

Why it matters: House GOP leaders' decision not to act on a Senate-passed plan has stoked tensions between House and Senate Republicans and raised questions about the path forward for ending the DHS shutdown, now well into its second month.

Washington, D.C. — As policymakers grapple with how to regulate AI, the hardest questions around copyright and fair use are being punted to the courts, according to governance, creator, and technology experts at an Axios expert voices roundtable.

The big picture: With Congress moving slowly and disagreements over policy, judges are becoming the primary deciders of how AI and the creators work together — or don't.

• That's partly by necessity: "Fair use is incredibly complicated — case by case, fact specific," News/Media Alliance president and CEO Danielle Coffey said.
• "Each case that we get … we start to get these new guideposts," Jones Walker partner Graham Ryan said.
• Ryan said they expect at least three fair use decisions this year that will have implications for the broader AI-artist ecosystem.

Axios' Maria Curi and Ashley Gold moderated the March 25 discussion, which was sponsored by Adobe.

What they're saying: Legal uncertainty remains. For example, two courts within the same district, and during the same week, differed in the reasoning behind their rulings on similar matters of fair use and AI.

• "There is a current, live controversy over … the extant understanding of the fourth factor in fair use, which is: Does the copy replace the market for the work?" said Kevin Bankston, senior adviser for the Center for Democracy & Technology.
• Still, "we have been trying to support the process through the courts, because we think there is a really strong framework in copyright law for protecting artists right now," according to Public Knowledge president and CEO Chris Lewis.

The bottom line: "This is about creative labor and about human creativity as much as it is about technology," Americans for the Arts CEO Erin Harkey said.

• There is an "importance of policy in this conversation, and not to just leave it up to market forces."

Content from the sponsor's remarks:

"We've spent the last 40 years building these products and driving this creativity," Louise Pentland, chief legal officer and executive vice president of legal and government relations at Adobe, said in her introductory comments.

• "We don't strip the internet. We don't train on non-licensed IPs," Pentland added.
• "The future of AI depends on giving creators more clarity [and] more control."