A federal judge on Thursday rejected a request by the conservative-friendly social network Parler that would have forced Amazon's web hosting service to allow it back online.
The tech giant had pulled Parler for incitements to violence on the platform, which was home to many supporters of former president Donald Trump and was actively used ahead of the January 6 siege of the US Capitol.
Judge Barbara Jacobs Rothstein ruled that Parler failed to prove the need for an emergency injunction that would have forced Amazon to restore the social network.
The judge said Parler could continue to pursue its lawsuit but lacked evidence for an immediate injunction and had failed to show it was likely to win the case.
The "balance of hardships may fall heaviest on Parler in the form of potential monetary loss," she wrote in an opinion.
But, she said, Amazon Web Services "has convincingly argued that forcing it to host Parler's users' violent content would interfere with AWS's ability to prevent its services from being used to promote — and, as the events of January 6, 2021 have demonstrated, even cause — violence."
Parler, which calls itself "the free speech social network," has been seeking a new web hosting service as it pursues its case against Amazon. But the judge said the case did not involve any free speech elements since Amazon is a private entity and allowed to enforce its own terms.
Separately Thursday, a lawmaker asked the FBI to investigate the role Parler played in the deadly attack on the US Capitol.
Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney, who chairs the Committee on Oversight and Reform, sent a letter to the director of the FBI calling for it to look into Parler as well as ties it may have to Russia.
Parler alleged in its lawsuit that Amazon was breaching its contract by not providing proper notice for ending service.
The conservative platform also contended that Amazon is violating antitrust laws and acting to help Parler rival Twitter.
Last week, Amazon said it had been in contact with Parler "over a number of weeks" and that during that time it "saw a significant increase in… dangerous content, not a decrease, which led to our suspension of their services."
Facebook 'supreme court' to judge Trump suspension
San Francisco (AFP) Jan 21, 2021 –
Facebook on Thursday said it is asking its independent experts to rule on whether former president Donald Trump's suspension for "fomenting insurrection" should stand.
Facebook and Instagram suspended Trump after his supporters stormed the US Capitol on January 6, an attack on the seat of democracy that led to Trump's second impeachment.
The leading social network is referring the decision to its independent oversight board — known informally as the Facebook "supreme court" — with the authority to make binding rulings even chief executive Mark Zuckerberg must abide by.
"We believe our decision was necessary and right," Facebook vice president of global affairs Nick Clegg said in a blog post.
"Our decision to suspend then-president Trump's access was taken in extraordinary circumstances: a US president actively fomenting a violent insurrection designed to thwart the peaceful transition of power; five people killed; legislators fleeing the seat of democracy."
Unprecedented circumstances called for unprecedented action against Trump, reasoned Clegg, a former deputy British prime minister.
Facebook's oversight board is tasked with making final decisions on appeals regarding what is removed or allowed to remain on the world's biggest social network.
Launch of the panel came late last year amid rising concerns about misinformation and manipulation around the US election.
Trump's access to Facebook will remain suspended while it awaits an oversight board decision, according to Clegg.
"We hope, given the clear justification for our actions on January 7, that it will uphold the choices we made," Clegg said.
Along with the ruling, Facebook will welcome "recommendations from the board around suspensions when the user is a political leader," he added.
Reaction to the Trump ban has ranged from criticism that Facebook should have booted him long ago to outrage over his online voice being muted.
"We have taken the view that in open democracies people have a right to hear what their politicians are saying – the good, the bad and the ugly – so that they can be held to account," Clegg said.
"But it has never meant that politicians can say whatever they like."
Members of the oversight board come from various countries and include jurists, human rights activists, journalists, a Nobel peace laureate and a former Danish prime minister.
