Drawing the Line Online: What Australia’s Youth Social Media Ban Signals for the World By: Maddie Hayden

Social media is becoming increasingly popular for those under the age of sixteen. But studies have found that teenagers who spend over three hours per day on social media tend to have worse mental health and overall wellbeing, including having negative feelings about the future, feeling as if they have no control over their lives, and feeling lonely, compared to those who use social media for less than three hours a day.[1] But is a complete social media ban the answer – and is it legal? Australia thinks so.

On December 10, 2025, Australia became the first country worldwide to ban social media for users under the age of 16.[2] The law requires specific social media platforms to bar users under 18 or face fines of up to A$49.5 million (or $33 million USD).[3] The platforms covered by the ban are “Twitch, Kick, YouTube, Threads, Facebook, Instagram, Snap[chat], X, TikTok and Reddit.”[4] The ban was introduced “as an intervention to prevent young people from the mental health risks that have been found to be associated with social media, including bullying, body image problems, and addictive algorithms.”[5] But some social media platforms are expressing their opposition to the ban.[6] For example, Meta (the owner of Facebook and Instagram) has said that the law will “driv[e] teenagers to less regulated parts of the internet,” and that teenagers won’t comply with the law, which will “result in [an] inconsistent application of the law.”[7] One reason for this is that the government hasn’t told platforms how they are supposed to check users’ ages, making the law vague and hard for platforms to enforce.[8] The only guidance that the government has given is that platforms should not request or require all account holders to verify their ages, as that would be “unnecessarily intrusive.”[9] Platforms also cannot “compel users to provide government-issued identification.”[10]

This law, and how the Australian courts rule on the challenges to it, will shape how social media laws like it will be implemented throughout the world.[11] It will hopefully end a debate on “whether any country could practically” and legally “stop children from using” social media, and “begins a live test for governments frustrated that social media firms have been slow to implement harm-reduction measures.”[12] Several countries, including Denmark, New Zealand, and Malaysia, have said that they may “study or emulate Australia’s model.”[13]

Immediately after the law was implemented, social media platforms filed suit in the Australian courts to challenge the law.[14] On Friday, December 12, 2025, Reddit (a global online forum) filed a lawsuit in the High Court (the highest court in the Australian judicial system) to the law, while still complying with the law in the meantime.[15] A Sydney-based rights group (Digital Freedom Project) also filed suit in November of 2025.[16] The suits both claim that the law is unconstitutional as an infringement on Australia’s “implied freedom of political communication.”[17] The Reddit suit asks the seven High Court judges to rule that the law is invalid.[18] Reddit wants the court to prevent the government from listing their platform among the age-restricted platforms (which include Instagram, Snapchat, and Facebook).[19] Reddit argues that “There are less restrictive alternatives that could achieve the [goal]…but without having such a significant negative impact on other human rights.”[20]

Sarah Joseph, an Australian law school professor, thinks that these platforms have a strong argument against the ban.[21] One of Joseph’s arguments is that the law cuts off the main source of political information from minors, and takes away those under 18’s ability to communicate their opinions.[22] However, Joseph believes that the High Court case will fail, because most like it throughout history (challenging legislation on the grounds of implied freedom of communications) have failed.[23] The Court will balance the constitutional freedom restricted by the law with the legitimate purpose that it serves, and Joseph comments that in many of these cases, “the freedom is engaged,” but the Court finds the law proportionate.[24] According to Luke Beck, a constitutional law professor in Australia, because “the law does not ban teenagers from using the internet or having online group chats[,] it’s likely” that the government will prevail in the case.[25]

There will be a preliminary hearing in late February to set a date for the Digital Freedom Project challenge, and Reddit expects that its case will be heard sometime in 2026, assuming that the High Court takes the case, so we will likely have to wait until mid-to-late 2026 to see how this law affects free speech rights of minors worldwide.[26]

[1] Josh Taylor, Excessive Social Media Found to Harm Teenagers’ Mental Health – But Experts Say Moderation May be Key, The Guardian (June 25, 2025, at 11:00 EDT), https://www.theguardian.com/media/2025/jun/26/excessive-social-media-found-to-harm-teenagers-mental-health-but-experts-say-moderation-may-be-key.

[2] Byron Kaye & Renju Jose, Australia Begins Enforcing World-First Teen Social Media Ban, Reuters (Dec. 10, 2025, at 13:34 EST), https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/australia-social-media-ban-takes-effect-world-first-2025-12-09/.

[3] Byron Kaye, Australian Leader Defends Social Media Ban as Teens Flaunt Workarounds, Reuters (Dec. 11, 2025, at 04:05 EST), https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/australia-leader-defends-social-media-ban-teens-brag-about-staying-online-2025-12-11/.

[4] Josh Taylor, Reddit Launches High Court Challenge to Australia’s Under-16s Social Media Ban, The Guardian (Dec. 11, 2025, at 23:21 EST), https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/dec/12/reddit-high-court-challenge-social-media-ban-australia-under-16s.

[5] Kaye, supra note 4.

[6] Kaye, supra note 4.

[7] Kaye, supra note 4.

[8] Rod McGuirk, Reddit Challenges Australia’s World-First Law Banning Children Under 16 from Social Media, The Associated Press (Dec. 12, 2025, at 12:09 EST), https://apnews.com/article/australia-social-media-ban-reddit-court-lawsuit-5d0d55e4f5668f66a5a3eed8f841d1ed.

[9] Id.

[10] Id.

[11] Kaye & Jose, supra note 2.

[12] Id.

[13] Id.

[14] McGuirk, supra note 8.

[15] McGuirk, supra note 8; Supreme Court vs High Court: What are the Jurisdictional Differences? New South Lawyers (Oct. 3, 2024), https://newsouthlawyers.com.au/supreme-court-vs-high-court-and-their-jurisdictional-differences/.

[16] McGuirk, supra note 8.

[17] McGuirk, supra note 8.

[18] McGuirk, supra note 8.

[19] McGuirk, supra note 8.

[20] Taylor, supra note 4.

[21] Taylor, supra note 4.

[22] Taylor, supra note 4.

[23] Taylor, supra note 4.

[24] Taylor, supra note 4.

[25] Taylor, supra note 4.

[26] McGuirk, supra note 8; Taylor, supra note 4.