Rapid Fire
Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh Plan Social Media Ban for Minors
- 07 Mar 2026
- 3 min read
Announcements by Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh to ban social media for minors have sparked a constitutional debate, as regulating the internet fundamentally falls under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Union Government.
- State Initiative: Karnataka (restricting users under 16) and Andhra Pradesh (restricting users under 13) are attempting to curb the negative psychological impacts of online platforms on children.
- Union's Exclusive Domain: Under the 7th Schedule of the Indian Constitution, telecommunications and internet regulation fall squarely under the Union List (Entry 31: Posts and telegraphs, telephones, wireless, broadcasting and other like forms of communication).
- Consequently, India’s digital space is governed by Central legislation, primarily the Information Technology Act, 2000.
- Measures that directly dictate terms to digital intermediaries traditionally require action from the Union Government.
- Due to the architecture of the internet, implementing a state-specific ban is practically difficult to enforce without the cooperation of the Union Government, which controls the gateways and Internet Service Providers.
- Potential State Justification: States might attempt to justify these bans by invoking subjects under the State or Concurrent Lists, such as "Public Order," "Public Health," or "Child Welfare."
- Fundamental Rights vs. Reasonable Restrictions: Digital rights advocates argue that blanket bans violate a child's Freedom of Speech and Expression (Article 19(1)(a)) and Right to Information.
- Any restriction must strictly qualify as a "reasonable restriction" under Article 19(2) and must be proportionate.
- Global Precedents: This localized debate mirrors a global trend, with Australia becoming the first nation to enact a nationwide social media ban for children, and Indonesia announcing similar regulations for users under 16.
| Read more: Social Media Regulation for Children |
