If it's legally prohibited, then it's an infringement alright. Posting the name of a rape victim is a disgusting thing to do, but we shouldn't restrict speech just because we find it distasteful.
"Then not posting the names of rape victims must infringe on you free speech also?"
I have come around to thinking that restrictions on that kind of publication shouldn't be allowed anyway. If other adult crime victims aren't protected, why should rape victims be different? False accusations of rape are far more damaging to the 'criminal' than other charges. Why should a suspect become less able to defend himself in the media, where these cases are so often tried, because NAG, er, NOW thinks that the burden should be on the accused in these cases?
I agree that the true victim and minors shouldn't be released. But part of the reason trials are supposed to be public in the U.S. is that so the accused doesn't get a kangaroo court. Rape cases are now biased against the accused to begin with. If we really believe in the idea that suspects should be presumed innocent until proven guilty, the accused shouldn't have to have their hands tied in the media as their reputations are being destroyed by overzealous prosecutors and they are smeared as guilty.