[hexage1814]

>defendants made public statements taking credit for the fact that Facebook and Apple had removed the content

It feels if they were a slightly smarter and not had made an announcement that about such fact they would have gotten away with it hell, this probably happens all the time, but other administrations maybe were more discreet. Be that as it may, regardless of this decision, which can be appealed by the way, there is that saying: there is nothing more coward than money – and would argue power as well. A single discreet Trump meting with Tim Cook, and Trump saying "I would be really happy if you removed that app, and not tell anyone that I asked you for it", could have been enough.

It seems these sort decisions are fundamentally useless:

* It doesn't even force companies to reinstate such apps.

* It doesn't give any constitutional right for apps to be on the app stores.

* It doesn't force companies to allow people to install apps from whatever they want, which would be by far the best solution

[eesmith]

The reason people are so shocked about the administration isn't the horrible things they do, but how they are so bad at it.

You can look at the financial blockade of Wikileaks as an example of how to get away with it.

It is impossible for the judge to change #2 as the 1st amendment freedom of association gives broad powers to Apple and Facebook to decide who to associate with. Also note there's no constitutional right to have phone service, so why should there be a constitutional right for an app to be in the app store?