Reddit and Digital Freedom Project Challenge Australia's Under-16 Social Media Ban in High Court

Australia's High Court on Tuesday began hearing two constitutional challenges to the country's ban on children under 16 using popular social media platforms. The seven High Court judges heard arguments from Reddit and the Digital Freedom Project, a digital rights group, who say the law should be struck down because it infringes the implied freedom of political communication. The ban took effect on 10 December last year, and the Digital Freedom Project filed its case a few weeks earlier. Reddit announced its own challenge in late 2025 after the eSafety commissioner said the platform would be covered, which Reddit disputes, arguing it is not a social media platform under the law. Reddit's counsel, Perry Herzfeld SC, told the court the legislation was passed within a week, with only 24 hours allowed for submissions, and that such a process risks producing ill-thought-out, over-broad law. Communications Minister Anika Wells, speaking outside the court in Canberra, said the government was defending a child's right to be free from harm. The Digital Freedom Project is led by New South Wales parliamentarian John Ruddick, who called the policy censorship. Two teenagers who first drove the case, Noah Jones and Macy Neyland, have withdrawn as plaintiffs.

The left-leaning Guardian leads with Reddit's argument and gives it the most detail: the 2021 parliamentary inquiry that did not recommend a ban, the eSafety commissioner's earlier warning of a "blunt force approach", the one-week passage, and the claim that the law has since been narrowed after Reddit sued. Its headline carries Reddit's "ill-thought-out" charge. The New York Times frames the hearing more neutrally, saying Reddit and an Australian digital advocacy group claim the law infringes children's constitutional rights. Both left outlets center on the constitutional challenge and the plaintiffs. The independent BBC and AP, by comparison, treat the hearing as a major test of a world-first policy. The BBC adds Wells's remarks, Ruddick's "censorship" claim, the teens' withdrawal, and the split between supporters, who cite protection from harmful content, and critics, who call the law too blunt. Right-leaning outlets had not reported this story at the time of writing, while left-leaning and independent outlets had.