"A brief search showed that the applicant gave false statements in their VISA application form, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §1546. Lifetime ban applied."
It's not. Image hosting sites have existed for decades. Websites are not liable unless they have actual knowledge of illegal content and ignore takedown requests. Stop fearmongering.
In case you don't know, Cloudflare already controls a massive amount of websites, have access to their unencrypted traffic and are making the web inaccessible for people who use tor or noscript. They are a threat to the open web.
Because people are blowing this way out of proportion. Users uploading illegal content is always part of hosting a platform and lawmakers realized this decades ago. Platform hosters legally cannot be held liable for the content of their users unless they have actual knowledge of specific instances of illegal content. This is both in the US (section 230 of the Communications Decency Act) and the EU (chapter II of the Digital Services Act, previously the eCommerce directive)
Have you ever seen the statistics? The DPAs are massively underfunded and the Irish DPC in particular is notorious for ignoring complaints, to the point where the EU is considering launching infringement procedures against Ireland for not properly enforcing the GDPR. If you think they will take action on a complaint like this, you will get disappointed.
On the other hand, petitioning the courts to intervene is probably easier than you think. In some member states you don't even need a lawyer, so all it takes is a bit of time and some court fees. I'm not saying it's the preferred option, but realistically it is the shortest path to a result.
It seems like this order is rather limited and the IA can continue almost all of their work.