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.
The intermediate scrutiny test didn't hypothesize what was on Congress's mind.
( z1 hypothesize :polarity - :ARG0 ( z2 test :mod ( z3 scrutiny :mod ( z4 intermediate ) ) ) :ARG1 ( z5 thing :ARG1-of ( z6 on-ones-mind :ARG2 ( z7 government-organization :name ( z8 name :op "Congress" ) ) ) ) )