France Just Voted to Ban Social Media for Anyone Under 15. Enforcement Is Where Things Get Complicated.
From ID Verification for Every User to Retroactive Account Deletion — What Happens When 73% Public Support Meets the Reality of Making This Actually Work
On Monday night, French lawmakers approved legislation that would make France the second country in the world to ban children under 15 from accessing social media platforms. The National Assembly passed the bill 130 to 21 in a later session, sending it to the Senate for final approval before it could become law by September 2026.
If enacted, the law would prohibit minors under 15 from creating accounts on TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat, Facebook, X, and similar platforms. Existing accounts belonging to underage users would be suspended or deleted. High school smartphone bans would expand nationwide. And every single social media user in France, regardless of age, would need to verify their identity through third-party systems before accessing these platforms.
President Emmanuel Macron celebrated the vote as “a major step” to protect French children, declaring that “our children’s brains are not for sale, neither to American platforms nor to Chinese networks. Because their dreams must not be dictated by algorithms.”
It’s sweeping rhetoric for a measure that faces massive implementation challenges, uncertain legal standing under European Union law, and a track record from Australia suggesting teens will find workarounds faster than regulators can close loopholes.
What the law actually does
The legislation targets what lawmakers call “scrolling applications,” platforms built around algorithmic content recommendation that can promote addictive usage patterns. TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat, X, Facebook, and Threads would clearly fall under this definition. YouTube and Twitch remain uncertain. Wikipedia and other educational platforms are explicitly exempted, though the government hasn’t defined “educational” precisely.
Messaging apps present particular complications. WhatsApp combines messaging with social features like Stories. According to Gabriel Attal’s team, the former Prime Minister whose Renaissance party sponsored the bill, WhatsApp would need to split its functionality, blocking social features for under-15 users while maintaining messaging access. It’s unclear if it’s technically feasible or if WhatsApp will deny the request.
The law operates retroactively. If you’re 13 and already have an Instagram account, that account gets suspended when the law takes effect. Platforms have until December 31, 2026, to verify the ages of their entire French user base and deactivate noncompliant accounts. New registrations would be blocked from September 1, 2026, the start of the school year.
Enforcement comes through France’s media regulator, which will compile the official list of banned platforms and monitor compliance. Platforms that fail to implement age verification or continue allowing underage access face substantial fines and potential blocking in France.
The smartphone ban extends existing restrictions. France prohibited phones in primary and middle schools in 2018. This law would add high schools to that prohibition, meaning students aged 15 to 18 would be required to leave phones in lockers during school hours.
The Age Verification Problem Nobody’s Solved
Here’s where things get messy. Entering your birthdate during account creation won’t suffice anymore. The law requires robust age verification comparable to systems France mandated for adult websites in 2024.
Two methods currently exist for French porn site verification. Users either submit a photo of their national ID card plus a selfie to confirm identity, or they use a third-party age verification service that stores identity documents and issues age certificates without revealing specific personal details to the website.
Both approaches raise immediate privacy concerns. Requiring every social media user to upload a government ID or register with verification services creates massive databases of personal information. Who controls this data? How is it secured? What happens when (not if) these databases get hacked? What stops governments from using age verification infrastructure for broader surveillance?
The Digital Services Act, the EU’s comprehensive online safety regulation, requires that any age verification system respect user privacy and data protection standards. Reconciling meaningful age verification with meaningful privacy protection remains an unsolved technical and legal challenge.
France attempted similar legislation in 2023, setting a digital majority age of 15 and requiring parental consent for younger users to create accounts. That law never took effect because courts ruled it conflicted with the Digital Services Act. The EU revised its guidelines in 2024, giving member states more flexibility to set age limits. France’s new bill was specifically crafted to comply with revised EU standards, though whether it actually does remains debatable.
The Australia Precedent That Isn’t Reassuring
Australia implemented the world’s first comprehensive social media ban in December 2025, prohibiting anyone under 16 from holding accounts on major platforms. The ban covered ten major services and threatened fines up to AU$49.5 million (28 million euros) for noncompliance.
Early results suggest enforcement is challenging. Australian officials reported that platforms revoked approximately 4.7 million accounts identified as belonging to underage users. That sounds impressive until you consider how many underage users created new accounts with false ages, switched to unregulated platforms, or used VPNs to bypass restrictions.
Within days of the ban taking effect, Australian social media feeds filled with posts from users claiming to be under 16 and mocking the government’s inability to keep them off platforms. Some changed their display names to “Under 16” or “Still Here” as acts of defiance. Others documented their workarounds publicly, turning circumvention into performance art.
The Australian government acknowledged the rollout would be “bumpy” and emphasized that perfect enforcement was never the goal. The objective, officials explained, was shifting social norms around youth social media use and giving parents legal backing to refuse their children’s demands for accounts.
That’s a significant retreat from “banning children from social media” to “making it slightly harder and creating a political cover for parental restrictions.” Whether France approaches enforcement with similar modesty or continues with Macron’s sweeping rhetoric about protecting children’s brains remains to be seen.
The Legal Questions the EU Will Decide
France can pass whatever laws it wants. Whether those laws comply with European Union regulations is a different question, and the European Commission has already signaled it will scrutinize France’s implementation closely.
A Commission spokesperson stated that France has the right to ban social media for under-15s but emphasized that the Commission must ensure the measure is actually enforceable and that platforms implement proper age verification. That’s diplomatic language for “we’re watching, and we’ll intervene if this violates EU law.”
The core legal question is whether France can unilaterally impose technical requirements on platforms that operate across all EU member states. The Digital Services Act was designed to create uniform rules precisely to prevent regulatory fragmentation. If France can require comprehensive age verification, can Germany require something different? Can Poland impose additional restrictions? At what point does the single digital market fracture into 27 different regulatory regimes?
Digital rights advocates have already raised concerns about the broader implications. Louis Boyard, a member of the far-left France Insoumise party, criticized the bill as “sleepwalking France into a surveillance state” by granting blanket verification powers to check the ages of all users regardless of age.
Nine child protection associations urged politicians to “hold platforms accountable” rather than ban children, arguing that the focus should be on forcing companies to design safer products rather than restricting access to existing dangerous ones.
Why this law, Right Now
France has been building toward this moment for years. Macron has made protecting minors online a consistent priority, linking social media to rising youth violence, mental health crises, and declining academic performance.
Public support is substantial. A 2024 Harris Interactive survey showed 73% of French people favored banning social media for under-15s. Politically, the measure attracted rare cross-party consensus. Macron’s centrist Renaissance party sponsored it, but it received support from the far-right Rassemblement National, the center-right Republicans, and portions of the left.
That broad coalition reflects genuine concern about social media’s impact on adolescent development. Research consistently shows correlations between heavy social media use and increased rates of anxiety, depression, sleep disorders, and attention problems among teenagers. Studies document exposure to inappropriate content, cyberbullying, and the mental health effects of constant social comparison.
Laure Miller, the Renaissance MP who presented the bill after leading a parliamentary investigation into social media’s psychological effects, framed the law as “setting a clear boundary in society and saying social media is not harmless.” She continued:
“Our children are reading less, sleeping less, and comparing themselves to one another more. This is a battle for free minds.”
But timing also matters politically. Macron’s presidency is winding down. He faces the 2027 elections with diminished domestic support after dissolving parliament plunged France into a prolonged political crisis. Passing landmark child protection legislation gives him a legacy accomplishment on an issue with overwhelming public support.
The fast-track procedure Macron requested ensures the law can be enacted before he leaves office. In France’s current political fragmentation, where passing a budget has become nearly impossible, social media bans represent one of the few issues capable of generating legislative majorities.
The Debate France Isn’t Having
What’s notable about France’s approach is what it assumes rather than questions. The law treats social media as inherently harmful to developing brains, requiring prohibition rather than regulation. It assumes age-based restrictions are both technically feasible and politically desirable. It prioritizes protection over access to information and social connections.
Missing from the debate is a serious engagement with what teenagers actually do on social media and what they would lose without it. As many adolescents, particularly LGBTQ+ youth in conservative areas or teenagers in rural communities, social media provides essential connections to people who understand them. For young people interested in niche topics, online communities offer resources and mentorship unavailable locally. For teenagers experiencing family dysfunction or social isolation, digital connections can be literally lifesaving.
Also missing is acknowledgment that banning platforms doesn’t eliminate the underlying behaviors that make social media problematic. Teens seek social validation, compare themselves to peers, and struggle with impulse control, whether they have Instagram accounts. Removing the platforms might reduce certain harms, but it doesn’t address the developmental challenges driving problematic usage patterns.
Several critics noted that restricting access to teaching digital literacy pushes problems into the future rather than solving them. When 15-year-olds suddenly gain social media access without prior experience navigating these platforms, will they magically possess better judgment than 14-year-olds?
Or will they be unprepared for the challenges they face immediately upon gaining access?
There’s also a class dimension rarely discussed. Adolescents from wealthy families have access to alternatives: organized activities, tutoring, travel, and enrichment programs. For economically disadvantaged teenagers, free social media access represents one of the few readily available forms of entertainment and social connection. Banning platforms without offering alternatives risks worsening existing inequalities.
What Enforcement Actually Looks Like
Assuming the law passes the Senate and survives potential EU legal challenges, France faces the practical question of making this work.
Platforms will implement age verification systems, likely mirroring the third-party services used for adult content. Users create accounts with verification providers, submit proof of age once, and then access multiple platforms without repeatedly uploading identity documents.
Sophisticated users will circumvent these systems through VPNs, false documents, or simply using accounts registered to adults. Some teenagers will migrate to smaller platforms not covered by French regulations. Others will find creative workarounds, like using foreign phone numbers or accessing platforms through international proxies.
Parents face complicated choices. Will they help their 14-year-old circumvent age restrictions because they believe the ban is misguided? Do they strictly enforce it, potentially isolating their child from peer social networks?
Do they allow access through their own accounts, creating compliance problems when platforms detect account-sharing?
Schools will struggle with the enforcement of smartphone bans in high schools. Unlike middle schools, where students are younger and more compliant, high school students are often adults or nearly so. Enforcing phone lockers for 17-year-olds feels different from doing so for 12-year-olds, yet the law applies uniformly.
And platforms themselves must decide whether aggressive enforcement in France is worth the hassle. Meta, TikTok, and Snap have invested heavily in safety features for young users precisely to avoid age-based bans. Being forced to block an entire age demographic in a major European market represents a significant business setback. Whether they comply fully, minimally, or seek legal challenges to delay implementation could determine whether this law actually functions.
The European Domino Effect
France doesn’t exist in isolation. Multiple European countries are watching this experiment closely, and several are considering similar measures.
Denmark secured agreement on blocking social media for under-15s, potentially becoming law by mid-2026. The UK’s House of Lords voted 261 to 150 to ban social media for under-16s, though the government indicated it would attempt to overturn the measure in the House of Commons. Spain, Greece, and Ireland are all examining various age restrictions.
If France successfully implements its ban and the EU doesn’t strike it down, expect rapid adoption across Europe. But if implementation proves chaotic, if legal challenges succeed, or if teen circumvention becomes widespread and public, other countries may reconsider.
China has restricted social media access for under-18s since 2021 provides an interesting precedent, though not one Western democracies typically cite. China’s approach involves time limits, content restrictions, and mandatory real-name registration. It’s effective at controlling access but operates within an authoritarian framework that European democracies theoretically reject.
Australia’s experience will be crucial. If Australian teens genuinely reduce social media usage and research shows improved mental health outcomes, that strengthens the case for broader adoption. The effectiveness of the system will be called into question if its use moves to unregulated platforms or if VPNs become universally used.
The Uncomfortable Questions
Several questions remain unresolved or deliberately unaddressed.
If social media is genuinely harmful to 14-year-olds’ developing brains, why does it become acceptable at 15? The science on adolescent brain development doesn’t identify 15 as a meaningful threshold. Neuroscience suggests significant brain development continues into the mid-20s. The age limit appears based on political compromise rather than developmental research.
If platforms are designing products that harm children, why does removing children from platforms solve the problem? Shouldn’t the response be forcing platforms to change harmful design features, regardless of user age? Age bans let companies continue operating as they do while shifting responsibility to parents and governments rather than addressing root causes.
If France truly believes algorithmic content recommendation drives harmful usage patterns, why not ban the algorithms rather than the users? Requiring chronological feeds or transparent content ranking might address harms while preserving access. But that would require forcing powerful companies to redesign their products, politically harder than restricting children’s access.
And if this law is truly about protecting children, why does it include provisions that effectively create a comprehensive surveillance infrastructure for all internet users? Age verification systems don’t just verify age. They create permanent records of who accessed what services when, potentially enabling tracking and monitoring far beyond child protection.
What Happens Next?
The Senate will debate the bill in mid-February. Given strong public support and cross-party backing, passage seems likely, though senators could amend provisions around age verification methods or platform definitions.
If both houses of Parliament approve the law, implementation begins. France’s media regulator compiles the official list of banned platforms. Verification system providers prepare to onboard millions of users. Platforms decide whether to comply, challenge, or withdraw from the French market for underage users.
By September 2026, French teenagers under 15 theoretically lose access to major social media platforms. Parents, teachers, and platform moderators manage the difficult task of enforcement. Civil liberties groups potentially file legal challenges. The European Commission keeps an eye on how EU law is followed.
Within months, we’ll know whether this represents meaningful child protection or performative legislation that generates political credit while accomplishing little. The question is whether French teenagers will truly stay off social media or find clever ways around the rules.
And we’ll discover whether other democracies follow France’s lead or conclude that age-based social media bans create more problems than they solve.
The Pattern That Keeps Repeating
France’s social media ban fits a familiar pattern in technology regulation. Politicians identify a genuine problem (social media’s impact on adolescent mental health). They propose a solution that sounds decisive (ban it for children). They implement measures that prove difficult to enforce. And outcomes fall somewhere between modest success and expensive failure.
It’s the same pattern seen with content moderation requirements, privacy regulations, and platform liability laws. Governments assert control over powerful tech companies through legislation that sounds comprehensive but proves challenging to implement. Businesses either meet the bare minimum, exploit gaps, or treat fines as an operational expense.
The result is usually something messier than advertised: partial compliance, incomplete enforcement, workarounds and adaptations, and outcomes that satisfy nobody completely. Children probably use social media somewhat less. Platforms probably implement somewhat better age verification. Parents probably monitor usage somewhat more closely. But the fundamental dynamics driving problematic social media use largely persist.
Whether France’s ban proves different depends on political will to enforce it consistently, the technical feasibility of verification systems that balance privacy with effectiveness, and social acceptance of restrictions that will inevitably be imperfect.
Macron’s declaration that French children’s brains are not for sale makes compelling rhetoric. Converting that rhetoric into a functional policy that actually protects children while respecting their autonomy, privacy, and right to information will be substantially harder.
The law is passed. The hard part is just beginning.
Thanks for reading. Share your thoughts in the comments, and don’t forget to follow or subscribe to stay updated whenever I publish.
Source: Euronews, NPR, Al Jazeera, The Irish Times, UPI, RTE, Digital Watch Observatory, CNN, Associated Press via Breitbart.