US-based platform Reddit has taken legal action in Australia’s High Court, aiming to overturn the country’s pioneering social media ban for individuals under 16. The company argues that the legislation infringes on free political speech and presents significant privacy concerns.
Reddit is currently complying with the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act 2024 while contesting its validity. The company contends that the law unconstitutionally restricts political communication by preventing young Australians from engaging in online political discussions.
Reddit’s Argument Against the Legislation
According to materials released by Reddit on Friday, the company believes the law is misguided, suggesting there are “more effective ways” to protect youth without imposing a broad ban that compromises privacy and freedom of expression.
The legislation, which became effective on Wednesday, mandates that platforms prevent Australians under 16 from creating accounts, with violations subject to penalties of up to $49.5 million. Reddit’s legal strategy challenges both the law’s validity and its own classification as an “age-restricted social media platform.”
“The political views of children inform the electoral choices of many current electors, including their parents and their teachers,” Reddit argues, emphasizing that the law “directly burdens political communication in Australia.”
Reddit also claims the law is ineffective, noting that minors could be better protected from online harm if they have accounts, which can have safety settings applied.
Privacy Concerns and Compliance Challenges
Acting on behalf of its Australian users, Reddit has voiced concerns about the requirement for government ID or facial scans to access the platform, which is traditionally built on pseudonymity. The company has never collected age information before and has had to develop new verification systems to comply with the law.
Reddit further argues that it should not be subject to the law, as it functions more as a public forum than a conventional social media network. The application of the law appears arbitrary, with platforms like Discord and gaming services with chat features, such as Roblox, not being subject to the same restrictions.
The company points to California’s Digital Age Assurance Act as a preferable model. This law, effective since October, requires operating system providers like Apple and Google to collect a user’s age or birthdate during device setup, converting it into an “age bracket signal” that informs apps of the user’s age range without sharing precise personal data.
Legal Battle and Broader Implications
Reddit has enlisted constitutional law expert Perry Herzfeld, SC, and law firm Thomson Geer, known for challenging eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant’s rulings on behalf of Elon Musk’s X. A directions hearing is anticipated in February, with a final judgment potentially delayed until late 2026.
This legal challenge coincides with another High Court case supported by teen advocates contesting the legislation. Communications Minister Anika Wells addressed parliament, stating, “We will not yield to intimidation. We will not be deterred by legal disputes.”
Inman Grant anticipated legal challenges, remarking, “We’ll see what happens” regarding potential High Court action. She added, “If the court makes a decision, we’ll abide by it. It may be that the Commonwealth wins. It may be that some changes need to be made to the policy. Who knows? I’m just going to move forward, given there hasn’t been any legal constraint placed on us.”
This development represents a significant moment in the ongoing debate over digital privacy and the role of government regulation in online spaces. The outcome of this case could set a precedent for how social media platforms operate in Australia and potentially influence global digital policy.
