France's Constitutional Council has struck down the central provisions of a law that would have prevented children under 15 from accessing social-media services. In Decision No. 2026-911 DC, issued on August 14, 2026, the council declared parts of the youth online-safety law unconstitutional. The ruling stops the under-15 ban in its adopted form and requires the government to return with a different legal design if it wants to pursue the policy.
Why did the council reject the ban?
The council concluded that the contested provisions placed a disproportionate restriction on freedom of expression and communication. It also found that the law did not provide sufficient legal safeguards for the right to privacy. The official decision described the law as requiring proof of age without adequately defining the conditions and limits governing that process. Reuters, the Associated Press and The Guardian reported the same central reasoning from the judgment.
The decision did not say that protecting minors online is an illegitimate objective. Instead, it examined whether the specific mechanism adopted by parliament was appropriate, necessary and proportionate. The council found that the measure failed that constitutional test. That distinction matters: the judgment concerns the design of the legislation, including its broad access restriction and age-verification framework, rather than a general rejection of child-safety policy.
What would the law have required?
The measure approved by French lawmakers in July would have barred people younger than 15 from opening social-media accounts from September 1. Platforms would also have been required to close existing accounts held by under-15 users within four months and to use an age-verification method approved by France's privacy regulator. Parliament approved the youth online-safety measure in July, before its planned September start.
Because an age check would apply beyond the affected children, the council focused on how proof of age would be collected and controlled. Its decision found that the adopted text did not specify enough about the conditions and limits of that process. The ruling therefore linked the freedom-of-expression problem with the absence of safeguards for private life.
What happens next?
President Emmanuel Macron has asked Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu to prepare a revised proposal. Reports from Reuters and AP say the president wants a version that can comply with constitutional and European legal requirements. No replacement law was enacted by the council's ruling, and the rejected provisions cannot take effect on the planned timetable. Any new measure will have to pass through the legislative process and face the applicable legal review.
Why is the ruling significant?
The case shows the legal difficulty of combining a broad age threshold with mandatory verification for online services. A government can pursue stronger protection for young users, but the enforcement method must still respect constitutional freedoms and privacy safeguards. For platforms, families and users, the immediate position is clear: the adopted under-15 access ban has been blocked. The details of any future French policy remain unsettled until a revised text is published, debated and approved.
The Constitutional Council's published decision is the primary record for the outcome and reasoning. Reuters, AP and The Guardian independently confirm the political response and the main provisions that were due to start in September. Claims about the final shape or timing of a replacement policy would be premature until the government releases a new bill.
