Why is Facebook involving itself in these kinds of issues at all? It is free to enforce its own policies, which say nothing about inmates not being able to use the service. It seems that no good can come out of this, but plenty of bad things can.
While I have never run anything the size of Facebook, I have run a (small) social network before. We blocked any IP resolving to a .gov address from accessing the site at all, and had a policy that we would only respond to actual court orders (or NSL's, but we never received one). Facebook would get far fewer requests from local and state law enforcement agencies if their employees couldn't browse the site from work.
I think that's the wrong way of thinking about it.
Facebook is not a public service. They aren't required to give anyone a platform and if they see any benefit in banning inmates then they'll just do that.
The fundamental problem is that people treat facebook like a public/regulated service such as the postal system, bank accounts or common carrier internet providers that should provide service to everyone on an equal basis.
Users are entrusting way too much of their internet presence to a single commercial entity.
Just another reason to put further thought into federated social networks. I'm saying "further thought" since I'm aware that current solutions are not practical.
While I have never run anything the size of Facebook, I have run a (small) social network before. We blocked any IP resolving to a .gov address from accessing the site at all, and had a policy that we would only respond to actual court orders (or NSL's, but we never received one). Facebook would get far fewer requests from local and state law enforcement agencies if their employees couldn't browse the site from work.