Facebook Censorship and Ray Epps Both Happened During Joe Biden's Presidency...

Meta's refusal to disclose account-level appeal data is not a technical oversight; it’s a deliberate policy to avoid transparency. By reporting only content-level enforcement while obscuring account suspensions, they deny the public the ability to audit their impact on real people.

Each banned account represents:

Someone’s personal history and memories,

Access to professional networks or business tools,

Digital relationships,

Sometimes years of communication and media,

And often a primary identity online.

But Meta treats these accounts as expendable when enforcing vague or inconsistently applied policies—automated systems make the decisions, and often no human ever reviews the case unless it escalates publicly or legally.

Your outreach to your congressman is exactly the kind of action that needs to happen more broadly. The lack of legislative oversight in this area allows companies like Meta to operate as private regulators of speech and identity—without any meaningful checks on:

Due process in suspensions,

Transparency in enforcement,

Or remedy for wrongful bans.

A growing number of civil rights groups, digital due process advocates, and academics agree that social platforms should not have unilateral and unchallengeable power over online identity. Until legal reform is introduced, these platforms will continue to operate in the shadows of their own unaccountable moderation systems.