“under the First Amendment, he had every legal right to be a complete a**hole”
True. But I’ve been involved in photography to a small extent, and I believe he legally can’t post this girl’s likeness unless she signs a Release.
That has been my impression also.
Non-commercial exploitative purposes are those in which a person's identity is used for someone else's benefit. This is known as misappropriation. For example, you cannot use a video recording of someone to promote a political issue without their consent
http://www.newmediarights.org/guides/legal_guide_video_releases_use_publication_audio_and_video_recordings#Non-commercial
I'd say that is exactly what he was doing in making and posting the video.
I was wondering about that also. Plus, if it’s a two-party consent state, he might have committed a felony.