Reddit challenges Australia’s under-16 social media ban in high court

Reddit has argued before Australia’s high court that the government rushed its ban on social media accounts for children under 16 through parliament, producing legislation that was too broad and later narrowed. Oral arguments on Tuesday focused on the company’s claim that the restrictions infringe the implied freedom of political communication.

Representing Reddit, Perry Herzfeld SC said the legislation was introduced and passed within a week in 2024, with just 24 hours allowed for submissions. He contrasted that process with a 2021 parliamentary inquiry that had not recommended a ban. The eSafety commissioner had warned that inquiry that such a measure would be a “blunt force approach”.

Reddit announced its legal challenge in late 2025 after eSafety said the platform would fall under the restrictions. The company disputed that it met the law’s definition of a social media platform. In March 2026, communications minister Anika Wells introduced rules adding requirements to the definition, including features available when logged in, recommendations or endless scrolling.

Herzfeld argued that preventing under-16s from holding accounts did not specifically address those features. He pointed to digital duty of care legislation before parliament as an alternative means of addressing them. Speaking outside court, Wells said she had not been communications minister when the ban legislation passed and that the government would present its response in court.

Since the restrictions took effect in December 2025, more than 5 million accounts that platforms believe belong to users younger than 16 have been suspended or deactivated. The ban currently covers 10 platforms: Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, Reddit, Kick, X, Twitch and Threads.

At the centre of the proceedings is whether restrictions on political communication can be justified by what the government describes as a “credible risk” of harm. The concerns cited include problems involving mental health, sleep and eating disorders.

Herzfeld said teenagers were prevented from participating actively in political discussions on Reddit communities such as r/Australia. Although they could read material without an account, they could not publish posts, comment or upvote content. When questioned about the restriction applying only to covered platforms, he argued that those services gave teenagers access to a far larger audience than speaking in the street or being interviewed by the media.

Justice Jacqueline Gleeson questioned the relevance of examples involving prominent teenagers who use social media for political engagement, including 6News founder Leo Puglisi, who started his news site at 11. She said the “vast majority of teens the vast majority of time” did not engage in politics while under 16.

The Digital Freedom Project, led by New South Wales Libertarian MP John Ruddick, is also due to have its challenge heard this week. Outside court on Tuesday morning, Ruddick appeared alongside the original plaintiff, 16-year-old Noah Jones, his mother, Renee, and One Nation senator Malcolm Roberts. The proceedings continue.