Legal challenge to Australia's social media ban to start in High Court

Two days of hearings on a challenge to Australia's landmark social media ban for children will commence at the country's highest court on Tuesday.

Key points

• The constitutional challenge in Australia's High Court was filed by the Digital Freedom Project a few weeks before the ban began on 10 December last year.
• Two teens who originally spearheaded the case, Noah Jones and Macy Neyland, have since withdrawn as plaintiffs though Jones is still projected to attend Tuesday's hearing.
• Platforms risk fines of up to A$99m (US$70m, £52m) for serious or repeated breaches, but since the ban began, no business has been fined.
• WhatsApp and online gaming sites like Roblox and Discord were not included in the ban, nor were educational platforms like YouTube Kids and Google Classroom.
• Communications Minister Anika Wells last year remarked the administration would not be "intimidated by legal threats."

In a major test of the world-leading policy, a digital rights group will argue that the ban for under-16s robs children of their right to free communication. A separate challenge introduced by platform Reddit will be jointly heard.

Introduced last December, the ban is a key part of sweeping changes the Australian administration has spearheaded over recent years on online safety.

Supporters say the ban protects children from harmful content but critics say it is too blunt an instrument and efforts should focus on improving online safety.

For context, the constitutional challenge in Australia's High Court was filed by the Digital Freedom Project a few weeks before the ban began on 10 December last year. The group is lead by New South Wales parliamentarian John Ruddick.

Speaking regarding the legal challenge last November, Jones informed the BBC that there were bad things online but a blanket ban for under-16s was not the right answer.

"We shouldn't be using the resources and money of these social media platforms to try to avoid fines from our government, " he remarked.

"They should be using this money and resources to try to get rid of the predators and harmful content out there."

Reddit additionally rolled out a High Court challenge to the ban, arguing the policy has serious implications for privacy and political rights.

"We will not be intimidated by major tech. On behalf of Australian parents, we will stand firm, " she remarked last November.

Under the ban, ten platforms – Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, Reddit, Snapchat, X, Kick, Threads and Twitch – must take "reasonable steps" to ensure no one under 16 years old can access its site.

Meanwhile, the eSafety Commissioner – the body tasked with enforcing the ban – has introduced a number of investigations into alleged non-compliance by Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok and YouTube.

In the first few days of the ban, Meta – which owns three of the banned platforms – remarked it had closed concerning half a million accounts.

Some children remarked they were booted off their accounts in the days before and when the ban kicked off – but plenty of have remarked they were able to easily circumvent the age checks which included uploading credit card details, photo IDs or a selfie.

For now, legal challenge to Australia' s social media ban to start in High Court remains the part of the story worth watching, and further updates are likely as more details are confirmed.