France's Top Court Kills Under-15 Social Media Ban — Macron to Rewrite by Spring

The Council censured Article 1 of the law, finding the ban "disproportionate"⁠8. JURIST reports the Council held the measure unjustifiably deprived children of their right to freedom of expression and communication, in language applying to all online platforms that allow users to interact in the ways covered by the law⁠9. In practice, the Council concluded that a blanket ban on an entire age group went too far because it cut children off from speaking, receiving information, and participating in public discussion online rather than targeting specific harms with narrower tools.

Expression was not the Council's only concern. The Guardian reports the Council said the curbs infringed freedom of expression and privacy⁠4. That second word matters because of how any age ban has to be enforced: to prove who is under 15, platforms must check who is not. The government's flagship effort to shield minors online was therefore left without a legal mechanism for now, since a universal age gate would have swept every adult into verification alongside the children it meant to protect⁠8⁠9.

The timing amplified the defeat. The decision came about two weeks before the ban was due to take effect, when platforms were to stop creating accounts for under-15s from September 2026, per Bloomberg via The Next Web⁠8. Only Article 1 was challenged, so a school smartphone ban contained in the same law survives⁠8. Lawmakers had therefore been days away from imposing new duties on some of the world's largest platforms, only to learn the core prohibition could not constitutionally stand.

The ruling was a direct blow to Macron, who had championed the legislation⁠5. Macron's office said he had no plans to give up on his push to bar children from apps such as TikTok and that the government would work on a new draft law⁠7. The Guardian reports Macron vowed to rework legislation⁠4. The political message was defiance, but the legal message from the Council was constraint: good intentions about documented mental and physical health risks to children and adolescents do not excuse a sweeping restriction that the Constitution will not tolerate.

What exactly was banned is clearer than what comes next. The ban covered platforms such as Facebook, TikTok and YouTube for under-15s⁠5. The broadcast narration also described the scope as reaching certain video games, but the web excerpts supplied confirm the social media scope and do not confirm the video-game element in visible text. Euronews describes Macron's push in terms of apps such as TikTok⁠7. That gap matters because any rewrite will have to define with precision which services are in, which games if any are out, and why the line is drawn there rather than everywhere.

France 24 interviewed Peter Craddock, a senior attorney advising social media companies, who called the decision "unsurprising"⁠6. The fuller argument behind that assessment was truncated in the excerpt provided, but the reaction captures the view in much of the tech-policy bar: a total age-group exclusion from major communications platforms was always going to face searching review, particularly in a system where proportionality is the test and less restrictive means — parental controls, default-safe settings, limits on addictive design, targeted restrictions on high-risk features — are available to argue over.

This was not, contrary to one line in the broadcast caption, an account resting on a single report published August 15th that had not yet been independently confirmed. Multiple outlets including Reuters⁠2, AP⁠3, Guardian⁠4, DW⁠5 and Euronews⁠7 published on August 14, 2026, covering the Council's decision. The Reuters and AP excerpts supplied were truncated before body text, so no verbatim official quotes from the Constitutional Council decision or from Macron are available in the material given, and no quotation should be inferred beyond the Council's finding of disproportionality already cited⁠8⁠9.

The broadcast described a government aim to introduce new legislation by next spring, with that spring deadline as the next decisive marker. Macron's office's commitment to a new draft law is confirmed⁠7, though none of the provided excerpts explicitly states a spring deadline, so that specific date cannot be verified from the visible text. With the narrowness of any new scope, how verification can avoid covering every adult, and which apps and games are actually covered still to be defined, the unresolved question is how any rewrite can protect minors without again crossing the constitutional line on expression and privacy.