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.
First Amendment doesnt apply here
( z1 apply :polarity - :ARG1 ( z2 law :name ( z3 name :op "First" :op "Amendment" ) ) :location ( z4 here ) )