By "pull out" do you mean Facebook would have to stop doing business with advertisers in France? As long as the servers are in another country, the French government would have to create a Great Firewall to stop its citizens from accessing that content.

"As long as the servers are in another country, the French government would have to create a Great Firewall to stop its citizens from accessing that content." Not really.

How to avoid Great Firewall, while blocking FB:

France could expect Facebook to deny requests for content originating in France, regardless of where FB servers are. No need for a Great Firewall; make FB implement the firewall.

Legal justification (if not ethical):

The server locations are irrelevant because the data has cross the border into France.

Enforcement (how to force FB to block itself):

Easy: make the executives criminally liable. Also, anyone working on FB infrastructure could be held criminally liable.

France is a big and important country, they have heft to get their way from companies like FB.

Geoblocking is common and if they are doing business in a country it's perfectly reasonable to expect them to do it as well as for the state taking measures to enforce non-compliance (though criminal liability of corporate executives is something we won't see anytime soon I guess).

What's not reasonable is to force them to block people in other countries (and also those taking significant efforts to conceal their identity) - at least there is no international law (compared to international deals) justifying that anyhow.

Yes, it means that facebook can't operate a company in france selling services in france and expect to ignore french law.

But then this is exactly down the road to authoritarianism.

I understand and support that companies have to comply to the laws of the country where they are operating/targeting an audience. If worldwide dispersion of content banned in your country is such a concern, you can either push it to the UN OR you make according deals with the states harboring the companies.

Otherwise you can go down the great firewall route and there's little difference between that and forcing hoster to effectively implement the firewall worldwide.

Real-life example: weed is legal in the Netherlands. So all neighbors could now force the Dutch to close all coffeeshops OR block all their citizens from entering the Netherlands. I don't see any difference to this case.