The Amazon subsidiary told the court it repeatedly sent notices to Parler expressing its concerns regarding third-party content that violated the terms of its AUP and CSA. The microblogging company did not address those concerns in an adequate or timely manner.
AWS argued that Parler “poses a very real risk to public safety”
Furthermore, AWS argued that the deadly riot at the U.S. Capitol prompted its decision to suspend Parler’s account since the microblogging company doesn’t have the ability to comply with its terms of service.
Parler admitted to having a” backlog of 26,000 instances of content that potentially encouraged violence.”
AWS believes that such type of content will further incite violence and Parler “poses a very real risk to public safety” because of its inability to comply with the terms of its service. It has no choice but to take the microblogging platform offline.
Judge Rothstein agreed with AWS. In her ruling, she wrote that the deadly attack on U.S. Capitol was a “tragic reminder that inflammatory rhetoric can-move swiftly and easily than many of us would have hoped — turn a lawful protest into a violent insurrection. The Court rejects any suggestion that the public interest favors requiring AWS to host the incendiary speech that the record shows some of Parler’s users have engaged in.”