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.
scrutiny tests are straightforward, as in theres a standard one for all cases
( z1 straightforward :domain ( z2 test :purpose ( z3 scrutiny ) ) :ARG1-of ( z4 resemble :ARG2 ( z5 test :ARG1-of ( z6 standard :ARG2 ( z7 case :mod ( z8 all ) ) ) ) ) )