Australia social media teen ban a 'modest' step, says government in top court challenge

Australia's world-first teen social media ban was ​a modest, non-partisan and justified curb on ‌political ​expression, a lawyer for the government told the top court on Wednesday, rejecting a legal challenge by Reddit. Nearly a year since Australia banned large social media platforms ‌from allowing under-16s to hold accounts, messaging platform Reddit and a libertarian advocacy group have sought to invalidate the law on grounds that it violates constitutionally protected speech.

The government is defending the law, calling it a necessary harm minimisation measure. A ‌win for the plaintiffs would be a major setback not just for Australia but for lawmakers around the ‌world who followed with similar measures in what has become a global movement to protect child physical and mental health in the digital age.

After a lawyer for Reddit told the court the law's imposition on free speech for minors was disproportionate to the benefits of keeping ⁠them ​off social media, Stephen Lloyd, ⁠for the government, said the ban was a relatively minor measure with proven positive effects. "The burden is indirect and modest in extent," Lloyd ⁠told the court's seven-judge panel on the second day of hearings.

The law "incrementally" reduced children's ability to send and receive content online, while ​they could still view some content without an account, he added, noting it was "viewpoint neutral" so did not ⁠target any particular type of political expression. Under the law, children and caregivers face no punishment but platforms can be fined up to A$99 ⁠million ($68.97 ​million) for systemic noncompliance.

So far, multiple studies including by Australian regulator the eSafety Commissioner have found that most of the country's under-16s still use social media, and the government has said it is preparing an enforcement lawsuit. On Wednesday, ⁠Lloyd said it was unclear if noncompliance was the result of weaknesses in age assurance technology or platforms' failure ⁠to implement it, but ⁠added that the law would contribute to the government's child protection aims regardless.

The hearing has been adjourned to a date to be decided, when the judges are expected to ‌give a ruling. ($1 = ‌1.4353 Australian dollars)