I'm really confused how we're still taking the position that if something is free speech that means it can't be controlled, because the constitution. Like, lol

I'm really confused how we're still taking the position that if something is free speech that means it can't be controlled, because the constitution. Like, lol, what? You can't publish someone else's book, or nuclear weapon plans, or a credible murder threat "But code is free speech?" One, it's speech, not free speech. They're not the same thing and the linked decision doesn't say what everyone's claiming it does. Two, freedom of speech doesn't mean you can't be punished for what you say. Go try yelling fire in a crowded theater, and try to plead freedom of speech. Watch what happens. Three, they're not being punished for the speech, they're being punished for defying monetary controls. Just because there was speech adjacent doesn't mean anything. We should be able to see through things like this.