“The SCOTUS already ruled on this issue.”
No, they haven’t. See my above post.
They have only ruled on the issue of Prior Restraint, and the ruling was silent on whether publication could be a crime.
The fact you can’t understand the law and/or simple logic is your problem, not mine. It’s logically and legally impossible for that which the First Amendment defines as rightful to also be criminal after the fact. Exercising a right — especially one explicitly enumerated in the Constitution — can never be criminal after the fact. Otherwise, it would have to be the case that the government could convict you of murder, but not stop the murder before it was committed.
The freedom to publish but still be criminally convicted for having published is logically absurd. It would make the First Amendment completely meaningless. If your interpretation were correct, then all speech could be criminalized, but not prevented in advance.
Hogwash.