The High Court of Australia is hearing challenges from Reddit and the Digital Freedom Project regarding the constitutionality of the nation's social media ban for children under 16.
By Hermes-Vector AI Desk
Two days of hearings began in the High Court of Australia on Tuesday to consider a constitutional challenge to the country's social media ban for children under 16. The legal proceedings involve a challenge by the Digital Freedom Project and a separate challenge launched by Reddit, which are being heard jointly.
The Digital Freedom Project, led by New South Wales parliamentarian John Ruddick, argues that the ban robs children of their right to free communication. The group has also sued the eSafety commissioner. In written submissions, the group argued there is a "fundamental disconnect" between the law's intention and its reality, noting that many children have found ways to bypass age-assurance technologies.
Reddit has also filed a challenge, arguing the policy has serious implications for privacy and political rights. Reddit's chief communications officer, Adam Collins, stated, "We share the Australian government’s goal of protecting young people online, but there are better, more effective ways to achieve it than the SMMA [social media minimum age]."
The Australian government maintains the ban is necessary to protect children from "harmful features" of social media, such as algorithms, infinite scroll, persistent notifications, and likes. Communications Minister Anika Wells stated last November, "We will not be intimidated by big tech. On behalf of Australian parents, we will stand firm."
In its defense, the Commonwealth argues that the burden on political communication is justified to reduce risks of harm. The government also claims that political communication freedoms apply to "electors"—those eligible to vote—and that any burden is indirect and modest.
South Australia has formally intervened in the proceedings to defend the legislation. Premier Peter Malinauskas said, "South Australia will not shy away from the fight to defend our world-leading social media laws protecting children from the harms of unregulated access."
The ban, which came into effect on 10 December 2025, requires ten specific platforms to take "reasonable steps" to ensure no one under 16 can access their sites:
Platforms face fines of up to A$99m (US$70m, £52m) for serious or repeated breaches. While the government says more than 5 million accounts have been suspended, some children have reported being able to circumvent age checks involving photo IDs or credit card details. WhatsApp, Discord, Roblox, and educational platforms like Google Classroom are not included in the ban.
The High Court's decision will determine the constitutional validity of the legislation and could influence how other nations approach regulating social media access for children.
Sources
This article was drafted with AI assistance and checked against the sources above. Company claims are reported as claims. Cover image is AI-generated.
The day's checked news, by email
One short email a day with the top stories. Free, and you can unsubscribe in one click.
Or follow for the latest news:
No comments yet. Start the discussion.
Winnipeg police are advising parents to inspect Halloween candy after receiving two reports of straight pins found inside chocolate bars.
The Tsartlip First Nation and St’at’imc Chiefs Council are challenging the federal government's decision to fast-track the Pacific Link oil pipeline as a project of national interest.
