Tell me how that's working for you in the real world.
Just as free speech does not extend to yelling "Fire!" in a theater when there is no fire, free speech can run up against a few other issues. In the case under discussion it pretty much falls back to the .gov's power to punish treason and the .gov's power to define what acts meet the definition of treason.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii
The changes in regulations change what is considered giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Up until now you can find the blueprints and instructions on how to build a thermonuclear device on the internet, and email them to your email-pal (modern equivalent of pen-pal) in Southeastern West Northistan. If the changes are put into place a strict (or not so strict) reading would make publishing what passes for a gun evaluation article in a gun magazine a treasonable act. It's just not going to be prosecuted as treason, but as a violation of a regulation designed to prevent treason.
DISCLAIMER: I do not support the proposed changes, but as I speak fluent governmentese I offer my translation services at no cost.
Caveat Emptor
stay safe.