Reddit and a libertarian advocacy group have challenged Australia’s social media restrictions for children under 16 in the country’s High Court, arguing that the legislation violates the constitutional protection of political expression.
The law, which came into effect in late 2025, prohibits major social media platforms from allowing users under the age of 16 to hold accounts. It received support from parents but faced opposition from technology companies.
The petitioners have asked the court to declare the legislation invalid, arguing that it infringes on the implied constitutional freedom of political communication in Australia.
Reddit has also argued that the restrictions should not apply to its platform, saying it lacks certain features traditionally associated with social media, including a reliance on networks of friends.
A successful legal challenge could encourage other affected technology companies to contest similar restrictions and potentially slow the adoption of such policies internationally. Countries including Britain and Malaysia are also introducing measures aimed at protecting young people’s mental and physical health.
The Australian government and Communications Minister Anika Wells, who is named as a defendant in the case, have said they will defend the legislation.
Representing Reddit before a seven-judge panel, lawyer Perry Herzfeld argued that preventing under-16s from holding social media accounts restricts their ability to create and respond to content on what he described as one of the most important communication platforms in the modern world.
He told the court that the restrictions imposed a significant limitation on political debate and substantially reduced the activities young people could undertake online.
Herzfeld said Reddit supported the government’s objective of minimising online harm but argued that the legislation was ineffective in achieving that goal.
He described the law as poorly designed, saying it did not prescribe specific measures to prevent minors from accessing platforms. He also argued that it failed to cover other online services where cyberbullying could occur, including gaming websites.
The lawyer further noted that although creating or commenting on content generally required users to have an account, large amounts of online material remained accessible to people without one.
Speaking outside the court, Communications Minister Anika Wells said the government would respect the court’s decision while continuing to defend the law.
She said the case concerned a fundamental principle of Australian democracy: the right of citizens, particularly children, to be protected from harm.
The High Court’s decision will be final and cannot be appealed.
