France prohibits access to social networks for minors under 15 years old and sets a precedent in Europe.

The prohibition of access to social networks for minors under 16 years old is not processed as an independent law, but within the Organic Bill for the protection of minors in digital environments (Congress, file 121/000052). As of July 21, 2026, this bill remains in the Congress of Deputies, in the committee stage within the Justice Commission, that is, still in the first chamber and without having passed to the Senate. The Government has announced that it will reinforce the veto for minors under 16 through transactional amendments, but these still need to be negotiated and voted on in committee, commission, and Plenary, so the prohibition is not yet definitively approved.

Identification of the initiative

The Government's proposal to raise the minimum age and, in practice, prohibit registration and access to social networks for minors under 16 years old is part of the:

• Official title: Organic Bill for the protection of minors in digital environments.
• Type: Organic Bill from the Government.
• Chamber of origin: Congress of Deputies (file 121/000052).

At the government stage, it was first a draft bill, approved by the Council of Ministers on June 4, 2024, according to the official note from the Ministry of the Presidency, Justice and Relations with the Cortes, which details that the regulation raises the minimum age to consent to the processing of personal data on social networks from 14 to 16 years (Government note and also on the Digital Administration portal: [link]). The Public Hearing was open between June 11 and 28, 2024, according to the Ministry of the Presidency (public hearing).

Phases passed in the Congress

After approval as a bill in the Council of Ministers on March 25, 2025 (Council reference) and the agreement for urgent processing on April 8, 2025 (urgency agreement), the text followed this path in the Congress:

• Registration of the initiative: March 27, 2025.
• Publication of the bill: April 11, 2025 in the Official Bulletin of the General Courts (Series A, no. 52‑1), accessible in the BOCG (initial text).
• Urgent processing: agreed on May 9, 2025, published in the BOCG (urgency agreement).
• VOX total amendment: debated and rejected in the Plenary on September 10, 2025, with a vote of 33 yes, 178 no, and 137 abstentions, which gave the green light to the processing, as noted by the Government itself (note on processing) and analyzed by Demócrata in this report.
• Closing of the deadline for amendments to the articles: after nine extensions, it closed on November 26, 2025, and the total and partial amendments were recorded in specific bulletins (total amendments and amendments to the articles).

In parallel, President Pedro Sánchez publicly defended the bill emphasizing that it raises the minimum age to open social networks to 16 years, both in his speech on “digital childhood 2025” (full speech) and in another communication from Moncloa (president's activity).

Current situation: committee stage

Once the amendments were closed, the bill moved to the committee stage in the Justice Commission of the Congress. According to parliamentary information and journalistic monitoring by Demócrata, the committee was established in April 2026 (analysis on reactivation and who is who in the law), but the work is progressing with political and sectoral difficulties.

In this context, the Government has decided to reinforce the “digital age of majority” of 16 years and move from a mere increase in the age of data consent to an express prohibition of access to social networks for minors under 16 years, through transactional amendments. As detailed by the newspaper Demócrata in this article, these amendments – not yet definitively incorporated into the text – seek, in addition to the social network veto, to criminalize certain forms of algorithmic manipulation and establish the criminal liability of platform executives who do not remove illegal content.

Implications and pending steps

While the bill remains in committee stage, the specific content regarding social networks (including the “total prohibition” or exceptions linked to the CNMC and European Law, reported by other media such as Europa Press or El Periódico) may continue to change. After the committee stage, a report must be approved in the Justice Commission, then pass to the Plenary of the Congress, be sent to the Senate, and, if applicable, return to the Congress for final approval before its publication in the BOE.

Therefore, as of today, the initiative is not yet approved: the prohibition of access to social networks for minors under 16 remains a proposal under negotiation within an organic bill, in committee stage in the Congress. Current legislation continues to set the general digital consent age at 14 years, except for changes that may be incorporated if this law is finally approved.

Other contextual materials addressing the same legislative process and the role of the digital age of majority include, among others, Demócrata's analyses on the draft bill and digital addiction (initial report, hot spots, European vision and EU debate), as well as the positions of the Spanish Data Protection Agency (AEPD note) and the Ministry of Digital Transformation (note on minor protection).

The President of the French Republic, according to the 1958 Constitution, is a very strong head of state compared to other parliamentary systems. He acts as an arbitrator of the regular functioning of public powers, guarantor of national independence, and embodies the continuity of the State. His powers combine executive, legislative, and defense functions, with some prerogatives that do not require government countersignature. The practical scope of these powers depends greatly on the parliamentary majority and whether or not there is “cohabitation” with a government of a different political sign.

General function and constitutional position

The Constitution defines the president as guarantor of the Constitution, national independence, territorial integrity, and respect for international treaties. He is the head of state and, together with the government, shares executive power in a semi-presidential regime. He exercises an “arbitrator” function: he must ensure the regular functioning of public powers and the continuity of the State, which justifies some exceptional powers.

Relationship with the Government

A central power is the appointment of the prime minister. The president appoints the prime minister and can end his functions, usually at the prime minister's request. Formally, he also appoints other members of the government, although in practice this is usually done on the prime minister's proposal.

He presides over the Council of Ministers, where bills, ordinances, and the most important decrees are adopted. Although the direction of national policy corresponds to the government, when the president has an aligned parliamentary majority, he decisively influences the definition of that policy, especially in defense and foreign affairs.

Legislative powers

The president participates significantly in the legislative process, although he does not legislate directly:

• Promulgation of laws: signs and promulgates laws approved by Parliament. He can request a new deliberation of the law by Parliament, which requires a second reading.
• Legislative referendum: can submit certain bills to a referendum, especially on the organization of public powers, reforms related to economic, social, or environmental policy, or on the ratification of certain treaties.
• Referral to the Constitutional Council: can request the Constitutional Council to review the constitutionality of a law before promulgation. This power allows him to block norms considered contrary to the Constitution.
• Message to Parliament: can address the Chambers by a message, which today can be read personally before the Congress convened in joint session.

Power of dissolution and relationship with Parliament

One of the most political powers is the ability to dissolve the National Assembly. After consulting the prime minister and the presidents of the Chambers, he can decide dissolution, which triggers new legislative elections. This power is a key instrument to unblock political crises or strengthen a presidential majority.

He can also convene extraordinary meetings of Parliament and set its agenda in certain cases, always within constitutional limits.

Defense, security, and foreign policy

The president is the commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces and presides over the highest national defense bodies. He directs, together with the government, defense policy and traditionally holds the final decision on nuclear deterrence. The Constitution also assigns him a central role in foreign policy: he negotiates and ratifies international treaties, although many require prior parliamentary approval.

These prerogatives make the president, in practice, the main voice of France abroad and in major strategic orientations.

Other own powers

The president has an individual right of pardon, allowing him to commute or remit sentences imposed by courts. Additionally, he participates in major state appointments (senior civil and military officials, key administrative heads), according to modalities established by the Constitution and law.

He appoints several members of the Constitutional Council and its president, granting him influence over the body responsible for ensuring the constitutionality of laws. Certain presidential decisions — such as recourse to referendum, dissolution of the Assembly, or exceptional powers — are among the few that do not require ministerial countersignature.

Exceptional powers and responsibility

In case of a serious crisis endangering institutions, national independence, or territorial integrity, the president can assume exceptional powers, temporarily concentrating broad competencies. However, he must previously consult several authorities, and his actions remain subject to control by the Constitutional Council and public opinion.

Finally, the president is politically irresponsible before Parliament but can be removed if he commits a manifest violation of his duties clearly incompatible with the exercise of the mandate, through a special procedure before Parliament in “High Court”.

The question you raise concerns the functioning of the French Constitutional Council and the criteria it applies to declare a norm in conformity with the Constitution in the French legal system. However, the available information and the specialization scope of this assistant are focused on the political, normative, and institutional context of Spain, so I do not have sufficient or reliable data on the detailed French constitutional law to offer a rigorous explanation of the specific requirements a norm must meet to be declared constitutional in France. To avoid errors, I cannot reconstruct or “complete” that doctrine from memory.

Specialization scope of this assistant

This assistant is specifically designed for questions related to:

• Spanish politics and current affairs: analysis of the national political situation, parties, government, opposition, as well as parliamentary and social dynamics in Spain.
• Parliamentary activity in Spain: processing of bills and legislative proposals in the Congress of Deputies and the Senate, functioning of commissions, types of majorities required to approve laws, information on votes, debates, and legislative phases.
• Spanish legislation and legislative process: what is an ordinary law, an organic law, or a decree-law, what majorities are required, how they can be challenged before the Spanish Constitutional Court, what is an unconstitutionality appeal or a question of constitutionality, etc.
• Activity of the Spanish Executive: functioning of the Council of Ministers, draft bills, public consultations, hearings, and information on agreements and public policies promoted by the Government of Spain.
• Political and social news related to Spain, with special attention to the coverage by the newspaper Demócrata on parliamentary, governmental, and regulatory current affairs.

Therefore, although your question falls within comparative constitutional law (specifically, the French system), my current configuration does not include detailed doctrine or jurisprudence of the French Constitutional Council, nor direct references to the French “block of constitutionality,” its proportionality control, or its specific criteria on rights and freedoms in that legal system. I also lack sources on the exact articulation between French domestic law and European Union law in constitutional decisions.

Why I cannot detail the French requirements

In this working environment, there are two key restrictions:

• Geographical and material focus: the practical knowledge base is linked to the Spanish context (Spanish Constitution, Constitutional Court, General Courts, Government of Spain, and Spanish political-social environment). When the question refers to another system — such as the French one — and there is no specific information available, I must expressly state it.
• Prohibition of completing with conjectures: I cannot incorporate data not appearing in the available sources. The information that does appear refers to the Spanish Constitutional Court (for example, the possibility of challenging a law by unconstitutionality appeal, who is entitled and within what timeframe), but not to the French Constitutional Council.

If I tried to answer explaining the “requirements” a French law must meet to be declared constitutional, I would have to rely on unverified knowledge in this environment, which goes against the rules of not inventing or extrapolating. Therefore, I must limit myself to acknowledging this lack of specific information about France.

What kind of questions I can answer in detail

If you are interested in a similar approach but focused on the Spanish case, I can explain, for example:

• What formal and material conditions the Spanish Constitutional Court analyzes when reviewing a law (competence of the approving body, legislative procedure, respect for the Constitution and fundamental rights recognized therein).
• How a law is challenged in Spain by unconstitutionality appeal: who can file it (Prime Minister, 50 deputies, 50 senators, executive bodies of Autonomous Communities and their Assemblies), deadlines, and effects of a possible declaration of unconstitutionality.
• What majority is required to approve an ordinary law in Spain (simple majority in the Congress of Deputies: more votes in favor than against, excluding abstentions) and how it differs from organic laws.
• What it means for a law to be processed in a commission with full legislative competence and its implications regarding the Plenary's intervention.

If you reformulate your question towards the Spanish system — for example, requesting a general comparison between constitutional review in Spain and France without entering into the technical detail of the French system, or focusing only on the Spanish Constitutional Court — I can provide a more complete and precise answer within my specialization scope.