Two Australian teenagers have launched an urgent High Court challenge against their government's controversial plan to ban under-16s from social media platforms, just weeks before the legislation is due to take effect.
The Legal Challenge
Noah Jones and Macy Neyland, both aged 15, are spearheading the legal action with support from the Digital Freedom Project, an organisation led by New South Wales Libertarian MP John Ruddick. The group filed court documents seeking an injunction to prevent the ban from commencing on 10 December.
The plaintiffs argue the legislation violates Australia's implied constitutional right to freedom of political communication. According to their submission, the ban would 'improperly rob' approximately 2.6 million young Australians of their ability to engage in political discourse through modern communication channels.
Constitutional Concerns
The court documents state the ban 'will prevent persons under 16 years of age from using account-based social interaction to engage in communication by, to and between them of political and governmental matters' on platforms that serve as primary forums for such communication among 13 to 15-year-olds.
The Digital Freedom Project contends that merely allowing logged-out access to platforms like YouTube doesn't provide adequate alternatives. They argue that interactive functions are essential for contemporary political communication and maintaining Australia's system of representative government.
Government Response and Industry Impact
The federal government, Communications Minister Anika Wells, and the eSafety commissioner have been named as respondents in the case. Minister Wells defended the legislation in Parliament, stating 'the Albanese Labor government remains steadfastly on the side of parents, and not of platforms'.
Under the proposed ban, major platforms including Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, X, Twitch, Kick and Reddit must prevent children under 16 from holding accounts. While platforms cannot rely solely on ID verification, companies like Meta and Snap Inc have indicated they'll use ID checks as backup when facial age estimation fails.
The teenagers expressed strong views about the ban's implications. Noah Jones criticised it as 'lazy government' that silences young people rather than implementing proper safeguards. Macy Neyland, who turns 16 before the ban takes effect, argued the policy would drive young people toward riskier alternatives like fake profiles and VPNs.
The High Court will determine whether to hear the case during its next sitting period in early December, creating a tight timeline before the ban's scheduled implementation.
