There have been historical cases in which members of the central Church leadership have apparently pressured local lay leaders to discipline congregants in a particular way, but that is against official Church policy and I’ve seen no evidence that anything of the sort was at play here. So apparently what we have in this case are local, volunteer members of the Church policing the boundaries of their shared congregation—and yet their decision does not just remove Kelly from that particular congregation, but from the Church as a whole
How anyone can see three near simultaneous church courts against three high profile members and not conclude some kind of direction from above is beyond me. After I read that paragraph I pictured someone in Cambridge, MA saying, "But like my daddy, I tool have read a few books, and I'm not a dodo either."