But you -- under your intermediate scrutiny test we would not be hypothesizing what might have been in Congress's mind. Your First Amendment test is a stringent one. You have to have an important purpose, and the means that you use is necessarily tied to that purpose. If you take that position, I don't see how you make the retroactive-prospective line work.
purpose is not necessary for this position
( z1 need :polarity - :ARG1 ( z2 thing :purpose-of ( z3 position :mod ( z4 this ) ) ) )