It is largely an untested theory. The USG asserts that his 1A protections do not apply because he is not a USC and speech was outside the US. That begs the ques

It is largely an untested theory. The USG asserts that his 1A protections do not apply because he is not a USC and speech was outside the US. That begs the question of whether the court then has jurisdiction. It is a good rule of thumb that if you are being tried in the US, the constitution applies to you.