So, does it go like this? DHS identifies what it perceived to be a conspiracy. Somehow applies some limit to free speech. The identified "conspiracy" group decides to fight this in court and produces evidence showing that this isn't a conspiracy, it is in fact true. DHS then has to pay penalties. Also, if the defendant happens upon a topic where discovery forces the government to produce evidence for things they have been trying to downplay/hide, then it is just win-win-win. There's a lot of potential for DHS to shoot itself in the foot here.