The law trumps their policy, to be blunt. They can't afford legal disputes so complying is the best thing they can do. They're still involved in legal shit for "giving away" ebooks too easily during the pandemic.
I only know what I just read on wikipedia about her, but it seems like she has been heavily doxxed — I'm guessing she requested this information about herself be excluded? If so, I'm not sure I'd classify that as censorship.
There are people that maintain "non-public archives" of stuff like that for litigation, long-term archival storage (think sealed boxes intended for future generations of historians. (Libraries, laywers, journalists can run their own WebRecorder, Perma.cc, ArchiveBox, etc. instances)
I think that's a reasonable middle ground, we don't necessarily need every single piece of heinous content mirrored for free access 24/7 the moment it appears anywhere on the internet, as long as there is some historic record somewhere that's probably ok.
An argument can be made that they should retain a copy for future lawsuits / investigations, but... kiwi farms won't have anything public, and I hope that law enforcement has their private archive where they gather everything.
