Reddit has launched a legal challenge in Australia’s High Court against a new law that bars children under 16 from holding social media accounts, arguing the policy raises serious concerns around privacy and political communication despite the platform complying with the ban.
Legal Action Against Landmark Child Safety Law
The challenge comes after Australia’s social media restrictions took effect on Wednesday, requiring platforms including Reddit, Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat and TikTok to prevent users under 16 from maintaining accounts. The law, described by the government as necessary to shield children from harmful content and recommendation systems, is being closely watched by regulators and policymakers worldwide.
Reddit said in a statement on its website that while it is following the law, it believes the policy fails to achieve its stated goals. The company said the ban forces intrusive verification processes on both adults and minors and creates inconsistencies over which platforms are covered.
The company said the case is not an attempt to avoid compliance or to preserve young users for commercial reasons, adding that most Reddit users are adults and that the platform does not market or target advertising to people under 18.
Second High Court Challenge Pending
Reddit’s case is the second constitutional challenge to the law. The High Court has already agreed to hear a separate case brought by two 15-year-olds from New South Wales, with a hearing expected next year. The teenagers argue the ban infringes the implied freedom of political communication under Australia’s constitution.
One of the applicants, Macey Newland, told the BBC that political participation should not begin at 16, contesting the premise of the law.
Communications Minister Anika Wells has said the government will not reverse course in response to legal challenges. Speaking in parliament after the first case was filed, she said the government would not be intimidated by technology companies and would stand by the legislation on behalf of parents.
Debate Over Effectiveness and Impact
The policy has attracted both strong support and criticism. Some experts and child advocates have warned that young users may bypass age checks or migrate to less regulated parts of the internet, potentially increasing risks. Others argue the ban removes access to online communities that provide connection for young people, including those from LGBTQ+, neurodivergent or rural backgrounds.
At the same time, the restrictions have received widespread backing from parents and public figures. Oprah Winfrey, Prince Harry and Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, have publicly supported the move, describing it as a decisive response to long-standing concerns about online safety.
In a statement, the Duke and Duchess said the ban represented an overdue confrontation between society and technology companies, while noting that the situation should not have reached this point.
International Context and Scope of the Law
Australia’s approach is the most restrictive of its kind globally. While other governments, including U.S. states and the European Union, have explored limits on children’s social media use, Australia is the first to impose a blanket ban up to age 16 without allowing parental consent as an exemption.
Reddit said the law isolates teenagers from age-appropriate online communities and creates what it described as an illogical mix of included and excluded platforms. The company said there were alternative measures that could protect young people without imposing broad prohibitions.
Featured image credits: Heute.at
For more stories like it, click the +Follow button at the top of this page to follow us.