With that said, in almost every other country in the world this scenario wouldn't have been a result of individual retribution, but just a normal procedure. The US is unique in that it vaguely allows visitors to publicly engage in political speech and protest for things opposed to the government's theory of what is in our country's interests, even taking positions that are directly opposed to the government or supporting groups that actively seek to hurt or kill the citizens of that country. If she engaged in this behavior in Germany or France or Spain or Japan she would have been deported without any real debate, and potentially would have been guilty of a serious crime (because lots of speech is criminal in these countries, and there are political and historical claims are illegal to express at all).
The key distinction is that, for example, Germany makes these rules explicit in the terms of the visa and is not arbitrary in their application. The issue here is not that it's 'unconstitutional' or 'wrong' to restrict the activities of foreign visitors. The issue here is that this was arbitrary and politically motivated arrest and detention, which cannot ever be allowed in a free society.
Germany's 'freedom of speech' is just qualitatively different and much less meaningful. It's illegal to burn the German flag, use a diminutive to address a police officer (du vs sie). More troubling it's illegal to insult a foreign leader (and the government must determine whether criticism is 'abusive', which would constitute a crime)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%C3%B6hmermann_affair
Chanting 'from the river to the sea' is illegal. Publishing statistics that suggest that refugees commit crimes at a higher rate. Calling a politician a 'criminal'. And of course the nazi stuff you mention. In general, 'human dignity' is considered more important that free speech.
I agree, the detention is insane, unnecessary, arbitrary, and a complete abuse.
edit: As to your other points - I would argue that stuff like the Böhmermann affair is a good example that free speech more or less works in most parts of Europe. Yes, there were - very old - laws about insulting royalty and heads of state. However, a state-financed comedian was able to push on those issues enough for those paragraphs to be changed/struck (as far as i remember, at least) - and he's still state-financed, still has his head and his freedom and still happily insults important people.
edit2: It's not really correct to state that the phrase "from the river to the sea" is forbidden, specifically. There are no legal means to ban specific phrases on a whim in Germany. There are, however, blanket bans on using phrases/slogans of organisations that are unconstitutional such as terrorist groups. The argument has been made that "from the river to the sea" is a Hamas-slogan but as far as I've kept up with the discussion, there are different legal oppinions on that and there's no final court decision yet.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/4/1/we-jews-are-just-arr...
https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/8/31/germanys-immigr...
https://www.wusf.org/2025-04-20/germany-seeks-to-deport-an-a...
https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/05/10/germany-british-palestin...
https://www.visaverge.com/news/germany-targets-deportation-o...
I mean there's too many examples to list.