How would you respond to an attorney who argues that the First Amendment protects the actions of paparazzi in any circumstance, without exception ?

The correct answer to this open question is the following.

I would respond to an attorney who argues that the First Amendment protects the actions of paparazzi in any circumstance, without exception, in the following way.

People have the right to exert their own freedom to the degree they do not mess with my freedom of defending my privacy or they do not mess with the privacy of other people.

So this means paparazzi have the freedom to allow for the best shots of artists or public figures when these public figures are in a public sphere or scene: working, public appearances, red carpets, and so on

But there is a fine but notorious line that these paparazzi must never cross. And that is the private life of people. And that always must be respected, no matter what.

Private life is of no interest to the audiences.

caliban is prospero's slave in the shakespear's play "the tempest"

as for symbolic actions, the narrator's tearing down the wallpaper in an attempt to find the "woman" in the wallpaper represents her struggle to retain or regain her sanity.   the wallpaper has been part of her confinement and by her tearing it down, she is freeing herself from that confinement.