[SimpleS14]

This is a very interesting topic on social media platforms and one where I don't think there is a straight forward solution. The rules and policies on these platforms change over time and will evolve at a rapid clip (compared to fed/state laws) because the technology and how they are being used (or abused) changes at a similar rate.

I'm just speculating here, but these platform owners probably had the Supreme Court case of Brandenburg v. Ohio in mind which the court held that the government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action". This might have caused Twitter and other platforms into action because of the aftermath of said speech and the fact that they don't want to be liable for another similar event occurring (which had rumblings already in motion).

In the case of Russian influence in 2016 vs. widespread election fraud claims in 2020, IMO, the main difference is both were presented to the courts but the former had credible evidence brought forward by DOJ leading to indictments and the latter was hearsay leading to cases dropped/lost and some lawyer running the risk of disbarment.

The actions taken against Parler were certainly extreme, but they can go the way of Daily Stormer and host their service outside of U.S. jurisdiction.