Connecticut law school student Cameron Atkinson says he wanted to test whether the social network was blocking posts that mentioned the identity ascribed to the whistleblower by conservative media outlets.

So he called the whistleblower a “hero” in one post and a “dirty rat” in another – and said in a third post that he has “conflicting thoughts” about naming the person publicly. All three posts were removed within hours, according to the complaint filed Tuesday in federal court.

Congressional investigators have kept the whistleblower’s name secret, voicing concerns about the person’s safety if it were made public. Mainstream media organisations have cited the same rationale for not publicising the person’s identity.

“Any mention of the potential whistleblower’s name violates our coordinating harm policy, which prohibits content ‘outing of witness, informant, or activist,’” Facebook said in a statement.

“We are removing any and all mentions of the potential whistleblower’s name and will revisit this decision should their name be widely published in the media or used by public figures in debate.”

Atkinson claims Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg “harbours political ambitions” and his censorship of concerned citizens “is intentional and is inspired by ill-will, malice, and a desire to deflect attention from himself and Facebook’s practise of surreptitiously mining data for profit from consumers who believe they are receiving a free service devoted primarily to their welfare.”

The case is Atkinson v Facebook Inc, 19-cv-01785, US District Court, District of Connecticut.