Reddit has launched a constitutional challenge against Australia’s groundbreaking social media ban for children under 16.
The legal battle began just 48 hours after the world’s first legislation of its kind went into effect, setting up a clash between free speech advocates and child protection efforts that could reshape digital rights globally.
Two days after controversial social media restrictions for under-16s in Australia became law, Reddit filed a lawsuit in the country’s High Court. The platform argues that the ban violates Australia’s implied freedom of political communication, creating what they call an “illogical mishmash” of restricted and unrestricted platforms.
Reddit isn’t fighting this battle alone. The company joins two Australian teenagers who launched their own constitutional challenge last month, backed by the Digital Freedom Project. Both legal challenges center on the same claim: the law unconstitutionally prevents young people from participating in online political speech.
The stakes are enormous. The ban began on December 10 and 10 major platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and Reddit, face fines of up to $32.9 million if they do not prevent those under 16 from having accounts.
Reddit View
Reddit’s legal strategy goes beyond constitutional arguments: they ask whether they should be classified as social networks. The platform maintains that it operates fundamentally different from traditional social media, describing itself as “a primarily adult forum with no traditional social media features.”
The company’s argument highlights a critical error in the way the ban was implemented. While Reddit is mired in restrictions, gaming platforms like Roblox (which police warn are used to groom children) remain exempt because their “important purpose” is gaming and not social interaction.
Reddit emphasizes that it is not about protecting the profits of young users. The platform states that it does not market or target advertising to children under 18, and that those under 16 “are not a substantial market segment for Reddit.” Instead, they argue that the law imposes “intrusive and potentially unsafe verification processes for both adults and minors.”
The verification dilemma reveals the law’s broader implications for privacy. Platforms must implement age verification systems, but cannot force users to provide government IDs for privacy reasons. This creates a technological puzzle that is like a game of Whack-a-Mole, as new platforms emerge.
The government redoubles its bet
The Australian government is not backing down on what it considers a historic child protection measure. Health Minister Mark Butler gave a scathing response to Reddit’s challenge, comparing the company to Big Tobacco and stating that its lawsuit aims to “protect the profits they make at the expense of young people’s mental health.”
Butler’s confidence reflects overwhelming public support for the law. The policy has garnered endorsements from high-profile figures including Oprah, Prince Harry and Meghan. More than a million minors are expected to lose their social media accounts under the new restrictions.
Constitutional challenges are already creating ripple effects. The eSafety Commissioner has demanded data from the 10 affected platforms on youth accounts deactivated since the law came into force. Meanwhile, downloads of alternative apps have increased, with Yope skyrocketing 251% and Lemon8 jumping 88% since Monday alone.
The High Court will hold preliminary hearings at the end of February, setting up what could become a landmark case for digital rights. The outcome will likely influence similar efforts around the world, as governments from Florida to the European Union experiment with their own restrictions on social media for children.
A new Stanford-led study challenges the idea that political toxicity is simply an inevitable element of online culture.
#Reddit #sues #Australia #social #media #ban #under16s
