Australia's High Court has begun hearing two constitutional challenges to the country's world-first ban on social media accounts for children under 16, putting one of the most closely watched online-safety experiments in the world before the nation's top court. Seven judges are hearing the joined cases in a two-day hearing due to conclude on November 4, though no date has been set for a decision.
The law, which took effect on December 10, 2025, requires major platforms to take reasonable steps to prevent Australians under 16 from holding accounts. It covers Facebook, Instagram, Reddit, Kick, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, X, YouTube and Twitch. Children and their parents are not penalised; the obligations fall on the platforms, which face large court-imposed fines if they fail to take reasonable steps.
The challengers' case
The first challenge comes from the Sydney-based Digital Freedom Project, which argues the ban wrongly curbs an implied constitutional freedom of political communication, taking that right from millions of young Australians. The second comes from Reddit, which argues the rules raise issues of privacy as well as political expression and are not properly suited to their stated purpose.
Reddit's lawyer, Perry Herzfeld, told the court the ban was "ill thought out" and amounted to a "profound restriction on political debate". Barring under-16s from holding accounts, he argued, stops them from creating or responding to content on what he called the most important means of communication in the modern world. Reddit says it agrees with the goal of minimising harm to children but contends the law fails to achieve it.
The government's defence
The Commonwealth government, which is defending the law alongside Communications Minister Anika Wells, argues the restrictions are a proportionate child-safety measure. Its lawyer, Joanna Davidson, told the court that children are more vulnerable than adults to social media's addictive features, including recommendations, continuous scrolling, repeated alerts and likes, because their brains are not fully developed.
Wells, who attended the proceedings, said after the hearing that she would respect the court's decision, which cannot be appealed, but would fight the challenge. Enforcement so far has been gradual: Australia's eSafety Commissioner has opened investigations into alleged non-compliance by Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok and YouTube, but no platform has yet been fined. Reuters reports the government has doubled the maximum fine for non-compliance to 99 million Australian dollars and given the eSafety Commissioner greater discovery powers.
What happens next
Early evidence on the ban's reach is mixed. An eSafety Commissioner evaluation found that 42 percent of children aged 10 to 15 reported holding an account on at least one restricted platform in a March-April 2026 follow-up, down from about 52 percent before the rules took effect. The court must still decide whether the challengers have standing, whether the law is invalid in whole or in part, and what relief, if any, is appropriate.
The stakes extend beyond Australia. Lawmakers from Britain to Malaysia are rolling out or considering similar measures to protect young people's mental and physical health, and a successful challenge could slow that global uptake, while a ruling upholding the ban would strengthen the case for age-based platform rules elsewhere. Separately, the minister must initiate an independent review of the restrictions within two years of them taking effect, whatever the court decides.
