To be clear, that is not really what Facebook is saying here.

"But that does not mean there are no limits to what people can say on our platform. When there is a clear risk of real world harm — a deliberately high bar for Meta to intervene in public discourse — we act."

They are still saying they will act, if they deem that the situation demands it.

"In light of his violations, he now also faces heightened penalties for repeat offenses"

"The Board upheld the decision but criticized the open-ended nature of the suspension and the lack of clear criteria for when and whether suspended accounts will be restored"

The biggest issue the Board has is the lack of due process and established standards. The decision was fairly impromptu. This is a reasonable concern.

"Our updated protocol also addresses content that does not violate our Community Standards but that contributes to the sort of risk that materialized on January 6, such as content that delegitimizes an upcoming election or is related to QAnon. We may limit the distribution of such posts, and for repeated instances, may temporarily restrict access to our advertising tools. This step would mean that content would remain visible on Mr. Trump’s account but would not be distributed in people’s Feeds, even if they follow Mr. Trump. We may also remove the reshare button from such posts, and may stop them being recommended or run as ads."

You can agree with the decision, and you can disagree with it, it is nonetheless not as described in this post.