Did you know Facebook established an independent oversight board a few years ago? Given the onslaught of news during that time, plus the fact Facebook wasn’t exactly putting on a PR blitz about it, you’d be forgiven for only discovering this fact; if you’re interested in catching up, the Yale Law Journal has an extensive overview. There’s also an ad-hoc “real” oversight board¹ made up of people who are much more critical of Facebook (Shoshana Zuboff, author of the The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, is a member and a good indication of not only the caliber of members but the goals).

As someone who first advocated for social media companies to increase their independent accountability back in 2013, I was (extremely) cautiously optimistic about this, even though it took nearly two years to get going and, thus far, hasn’t been given much to do.

Well, now Trump has been “indefinitely banned” from using any Facebook service, which is exactly the sort of thing an oversight board should be taking on. Ben Smith, writing in his media column for The New York Times, talked to several members of the official board as it grapples with its first real test as a new kind of “supercourt” in an age where corporations wield as much power as most nations.

Banning Trump is the rare instance of Facebook both doing the right thing (eventually and much too late) and doing what’s best for their business. With Trump gone, both from Facebook’s properties and the White House, it’s surely a relief for their largely (allegedly) liberal workforce who no longer needs to have their noses rubbed in the actual results of their day-to-day work.

However, if the oversight board decides Trump should be allowed to return to the service, it will not only be a thorn in Zuck’s side and a depressing outcome for the thousands of Facebook employees who prefer not to be reminded their jobs have real-world consequences, but a principled (if ultimately wrong) stand that will undoubtedly have a dire outcome. There’s also a very real chance that Facebook will be the only major platform with a Trump presence, since Twitter, YouTube, et al have shown exactly zero interest in joining the Oversight Board.

It would be an interesting outcome for those of us who are longstanding critics of social media, and Facebook specifically. I’ve said for years that Trump should have to abide by the extremely generous and mercurial rules the platforms invent and cheered when Trump was finally shown the door. Letting Trump back on would be, as has been obvious for years and all the more so now that he’s been muzzled, an unequivocally bad thing. It would also shine a bright light on what Facebook is. If the ban stays in place, Trump would be denied a megaphone and rallying place for his revanchist supporters, but Facebook would be allowed off the hook.