Case thrown out for “for lack of evidence”? NOT on First Amendment violations? I find that troublesome.
A procedural error is less time consuming, and far easier to justify to an appellate court, because it doesn't require any analysis of the subject matter. Was there a First Amendment violation? On its fact, the answer appears to be "yes." Did that battle need to be fought? No.
You make a good point about the burden of proof, but you wrote “Did that battle need to be fought? No.”
I disagree. As usual, they are just kicking the can down the road re: 1A violations for a future court to handle. I get tired of the courts doing that. These issues need to be settled once and for all, preferably now and not at some point in the future. It would appear that this is an excellent test (and potentially landmark) case.