--- title: "Reddit's High Court fight against Australia's teen ban opens with the bench leaning the other way" description: "The first court test of the under-16 account ban opened in Canberra, and several justices signaled the law can stand." publisher: "The Inference" section: "Policy & Labor" published: 2026-11-03T17:05:24.336Z modified: 2026-11-03T17:05:24.336Z canonical: https://theinference.org/article/reddit-s-high-court-fight-against-australia-s-teen-ban-opens-with-the-bench-leaning-the-other-way language: en keywords: "Reddit, Regulation, Australia, Courts, Social Media" --- # Reddit's High Court fight against Australia's teen ban opens with the bench leaning the other way > The first court test of the under-16 account ban opened in Canberra, and several justices signaled the law can stand. [Reddit](https://theinference.org/markets/companies/reddit) opened its High Court challenge to Australia's under-16 social media ban on Monday facing a skeptical bench [2]. Counsel Perry Herzfeld [called the world-first law "ill thought out" and a "profound restriction on political debate"](https://www.nbcnews.com/world/asia/reddit-blasts-australias-inept-social-media-ban-court-challenge-begins-rcna607178) [2]. Communications Minister Anika Wells, the named defendant, told reporters outside court that an Australian child's "right to be free from harm" is a "fundamental tenet of Australia's democracy" [1]. ## The bench is not buying the speech argument Twenty-five barristers are contesting the fate of the ban, which took effect in late 2025 and bars large platforms from giving accounts to anyone under 16 [1]. After the first day, several justices signaled doubt. Justices Simon Steward and Jacqueline Gleeson suggested children can still spread political messages on WhatsApp, which the law does not cover. Justice Jayne Jagot and Justice Michelle Gordon noted nobody stops a child posting through an adult's account. Justice James Edelman called the risks at stake, including depression and suicidal ideation, "not trivial" [1]. Herzfeld's structural argument is narrower: the eSafety Commissioner never recommended the ban and [once called it a "blunt force approach,"](https://www.politico.com/news/2026/11/03/reddit-slams-australias-ill-thought-out-and-overbroad-social-media-age-restrictions-01145909) and the government rushed the bill through in eight days in November 2024 instead of regulating the features, like endless feeds, that actually cause harm [1]. Reddit itself concedes a "credible risk" of addiction, but argues unquantified risks cannot justify the burden on speech [1]. ## A crowded courtroom tells you where this lands NetChoice, the US industry group for the targeted platforms, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation have intervened for Reddit; every Australian state and territory has intervened against it [1]. The template is already exporting: versions of the ban exist in Brazil, Malaysia, Indonesia, the UAE, the UK and Turkey, with bills before parliaments in France, Austria, Denmark, Norway, Spain, Greece, New Zealand, Costa Rica, Canada, Slovakia, Italy, the EU and several US states [1]. Whatever the High Court decides, this ruling is the reference case the copies will cite. Enforcement is tightening regardless of the outcome. Since the ban took effect, the government has doubled the maximum fine to AU$99 million (US$69.5 million), given the eSafety Commissioner greater discovery powers, and is preparing an enforcement lawsuit against some of the biggest platforms [2]. Its own studies find most under-16s still use social media [2]. *Chart: **Reddit's revenue is still growing, but the growth rate is halving** Column chart of Reddit's quarterly revenue from Q4 2024 to Q4 2026, showing growth slowing from 71 percent year over year to a guided 40 percent* *Reddit's quarterly revenue in millions of US dollars, from its SEC filings, with the Q4 2026 column at the midpoint of company guidance of $1.0 to $1.03 billion. Source: Reddit SEC filings (4). [4]* ## Why investors are watching an Australian courtroom The ruling lands on a company already repriced. Reddit stock fell 29% to $91.73 on October 30 after [third-quarter results](https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0001713445) showed US daily users down 2.5 million to 50.7 million and Q4 revenue guidance of $1.0 to $1.03 billion, below the $1.045 billion consensus [3]. Revenue growth slowed from 71% a year ago to 53% last quarter [4]. CEO Steve Huffman blamed Google's AI search for [cutting referrals by more than a million a week](https://coincentral.com/reddit-rddt-stock-plunges-29-after-google-ai-cuts-us-traffic/), and [Reddit plans to require logins](https://theinference.org/article/reddit-locks-its-front-door-everyone-logs-in-as-us-users-shrink-and-revenue-jumps-53) to shore up traffic [3]. That is the compliance problem in one sentence: the ban targets logged-in accounts, and the login wall Reddit is building is exactly what makes an age-verification regime enforceable. ## What Reddit earns where the ban cannot reach The exposure runs through advertising tied to user counts, not licensing. Reddit collects $60 million and $70 million a year from its [Google](https://theinference.org/markets/companies/alphabet) and [OpenAI](https://theinference.org/markets/companies/openai) data deals [3], revenue the ban cannot touch, while its ad business depends on the logged-in audiences an age wall restricts. In the six countries with bans already live, and the 15-plus where bills are pending, a hardened template raises both the compliance bill and the risk to user counts in markets where Reddit still grows [3]. The hearing continues on Wednesday [1]. The tell is specific: if the justices press the government on why features were not regulated separately, a win for Reddit narrows the template before more parliaments copy it; if the bench holds to WhatsApp and adult accounts as adequate outlets, expect the age-verification bills in those 15-plus jurisdictions to advance, and watch Reddit's US logged-in user count, which the company says it needs to hold above 23.4 million, when it reports next [3]. ## Takeaway Australia's High Court heard Reddit's challenge to the under-16 social media ban, and the first day's signals favor the government; with the template exporting to 15-plus parliaments and enforcement tightening, the stakes run through Reddit's logged-in ad audience, not its licensing revenue. ## Sources 1. [Politico, Reddit slams 'ill-thought-out and overbroad' social media age restrictions, 3 November 2026](https://www.politico.com/news/2026/11/03/reddit-slams-australias-ill-thought-out-and-overbroad-social-media-age-restrictions-01145909) 2. [NBC News, Reddit blasts Australia's 'inept' social media ban as court challenge begins, 3 November 2026](https://www.nbcnews.com/world/asia/reddit-blasts-australias-inept-social-media-ban-court-challenge-begins-rcna607178) 3. [CoinCentral, Reddit (RDDT) Stock Plunges 29% After Google AI Cuts US Traffic, 1 November 2026](https://coincentral.com/reddit-rddt-stock-plunges-29-after-google-ai-cuts-us-traffic/) 4. [Reddit, quarterly figures from its SEC filings, retrieved 3 November 2026](https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0001713445) --- Reddit's High Court fight against Australia's teen ban opens with the bench leaning the other way — The Inference. Canonical: https://theinference.org/article/reddit-s-high-court-fight-against-australia-s-teen-ban-opens-with-the-bench-leaning-the-other-way