FranceInterdiction d'accès des mineurs de quinze ans aux réseaux sociaux, article 1er de la loi visant à protéger les mineurs des risques auxquels les expose l'utilisation des réseaux sociaux (Under-15 social media ban, article 1 of the law to protect minors from the risks posed by social media use), déclaré contraire à la Constitution
Conseil constitutionnel décision n° 2026-911 DC du 14 août 2026, art. 1er (l'article 1er de la loi visant à protéger les mineurs des risques auxquels les expose l'utilisation des réseaux sociaux est contraire à la Constitution); loi promulguée sans cet article sous le n° 2026-813 du 24 août 2026, JO du 25 août 2026 (ex proposition de loi n° 2107, 17e législature)
A social media and minors rule binding private bodies.
What it requires
- Struck down, so read this as context rather than a live duty: the Conseil constitutionnel held in decision n° 2026-911 DC of that article 1, the under-15 social media ban, is contrary to the Constitution, and the rest of the law was promulgated on without it.
- The ban would have barred minors under 15 from online social media platforms, covering interactive social media and video sharing platforms and excluding private interpersonal messaging services.
- The Conseil held that the ban reached every platform letting users connect and share content without regard to the individual minor or each service's risks, and that making every user, adults included, prove their age without legal limits gave none of the guarantees the right to private life requires.
- A Sénat report filed on (n° 468) states that the separate 2023 digital majority law, which would require parental consent for a social media account under 15, had never entered into force.
These lines are LexLint's reading of the law's text. Also read by: Conseil constitutionnel, décision n° 2026-911 DC du 14 août 2026 (recorded ).
Who enforces it
Enforcement body
None: article 1 was struck before promulgation and never entered into force, so no authority enforces it.
Litigation
- Posture
- Struck down on a priori constitutional review. The Conseil constitutionnel, seized on by more than sixty deputies under article 61 of the Constitution, held in decision n° 2026-911 DC of that article 1 of the law, the under-15 ban, is contrary to the Constitution. The law was promulgated on without that article. Earlier in the same file, the European Commission's detailed opinion of under Directive (EU) 2015/1535 had found several provisions of the Sénat's version incompatible with the Digital Services Act.
Settledness
The Conseil constitutionnel held article 1 contrary to the Constitution before promulgation, on a priori review, and the law was promulgated without it, so no duty remains to be interpreted.
- As of
- Case link
- https://www.conseil-constitutionnel.fr/decision/2026/2026911DC.htm
- Case citation
- Conseil constitutionnel, décision n° 2026-911 DC du 14 août 2026
What it reaches
Age threshold
15
Covered services
Interactive social media and video sharing platforms; private interpersonal messaging services are excluded.
Verification methods
Digital ID, Third party service, Facial estimation, Parental consent
What this law does
This provision does not bind anyone: it was struck before it could enter the statute book. Article 1 of the bill would have banned access to online social media platforms for minors under 15, by inserting a new section 3 bis (Protection des mineurs en ligne, Protection of minors online) and a new article 6-9 into the law of . The Assemblée nationale and the Sénat agreed a joint text in a commission mixte paritaire (joint committee) on .
More than sixty deputies then referred the law to the Conseil constitutionnel on . In decision n° 2026-911 DC of the Conseil held article 1 contrary to the Constitution on two grounds.
First, because the ban reached every online platform letting end users connect, communicate, share content and discover other users, without regard to the individual minor's situation or to the risks specific to each service, it was not suitable, necessary or proportionate to the objective pursued, and so infringed the freedom of expression and communication under article 11 of the 1789 Declaration.
Second, because banning under-15s from those services meant that every user, adults included, would have to prove their age, and the legislature set no conditions or limits for that proof, it provided none of the legal guarantees that the right to respect for private life requires. The Conseil raised no question of its own motion about the law's other provisions and did not rule on them.
The remainder of the law was promulgated as Loi n° 2026-813 du 24 août 2026 and published in the Journal officiel (official gazette) on . Besides the struck article 1, it keeps two articles, numbered 2 and 3. Article 2 adds a reference to article 223-14 of the Code pénal in article 131-35-1 of that code and in article 6 of the law of . Article 3 (article 6 of the adopted text) adds to each school project a part on the use of digital technologies in the school.
It also extends article L. 511-5 of the Code de l'éducation from écoles and collèges to lycées. That article bans the use of a mobile phone or other connected device within écoles and collèges. Article 3 (article 6 of the adopted text) enters into force at the start of the 2026-2027 school year (rentrée scolaire).
A Sénat report filed on (n° 468) states that the separate 2023 digital majority law, which would require parental consent for a social media account under 15, had never entered into force.
How courts have read itPremium data
Our analysis of this law draws on 1 court ruling.
What each ruling held, what it means for an app, and whether it still stands are premium data, in the Plus, Pro and Enterprise plans.
When LexLint raises it
When your app profile says your app operates a social platform.
Back to the example · Lint your app
Page updated .