Looks like we’re on the same page, although I at first interpreted your “LOL” as an endorsement of the Donald’s legal acumen, as if he’d somehow devised some unassailable constitutional argument. Sorry about the misinterpretation, but around here, well...you know.
I mistook your "has nothing to do with case" as coming from a belief that the case made a first amendment claim, but now I see that your remark can be taken as meaning "the case doesn't make a first amendment claim."
-- Sorry about the misinterpretation, but around here, well...you know. --
Yeah, I make many mistakes, including misattribution, misunderstanding, and often enough, plain rank stupidity. No need to apologize. Now that I know you look things up for yourself, and have at least a basic handle on the guts of lawsuits, I know you don't need any help from me!