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.
Congress isnt involved in the issue at all
( z1 involve :polarity - :ARG1 ( z2 government-organization :name ( z3 name :op "Congress" ) ) :ARG2 ( z4 issue ) :mod ( z5 at-all ) )