Evidence since January 2021 shows that major platforms did broaden and systematize content moderation and deplatforming rather than treating Trump’s ban as a one‑off.

• Shortly after Trump’s suspension, alternative network Parler was itself deplatformed by app stores and its hosting provider in early 2021, demonstrating that coordinated infrastructure‑level bans expanded beyond a single political figure. (arxiv.org)
• YouTube repeatedly widened its rules: first extending its COVID‑19 vaccine misinformation ban to all vaccines in 2021, then introducing broad medical‑misinformation policies in 2023 that remove content contradicting health‑authority guidance and target a wide range of conditions and treatments. These policies have led to removals of major anti‑vaccine channels and large volumes of videos. (forbes.com)
• Meta (Facebook/Instagram) formalized long suspensions and escalating sanctions for public figures, created a dedicated “Crisis Policy Protocol,” and embedded broader rules for restricting content that could contribute to civil unrest or election delegitimization—explicitly going beyond the singular Trump case. (about.fb.com)
• The scale and persistence of moderation and deplatforming were significant enough that Texas passed HB20, an anti‑deplatforming law in 2021 aimed at curbing large platforms’ ability to moderate based on “viewpoint,” indicating that broad, ongoing content restrictions—not an isolated event—were occurring. (en.wikipedia.org)
• By 2024–25, some platforms began loosening certain rules (e.g., Meta ending third‑party fact‑checking and narrowing enforcement; YouTube carving out more exceptions for “public interest” content; X under Elon Musk dismantling many prior policies), but these moves themselves confirm that a prior period of expansive moderation had been built up and was influential enough to provoke political and legal backlash. (techcrunch.com)

Taken together, the post‑January‑2021 trajectory shows several years of expanded, more formalized use of deplatforming and moderation powers across multiple major platforms. That means Sacks’s core claim—that Trump’s ban marked the beginning of a broader, continuing exercise of these powers rather than a one‑off—has largely been borne out, even though there has since been some partial retrenchment.