The woman was exercising the first right guaranteed by the Constitution in a setting where her peers were gathered to hear what their own had to say. Nothing could be more normal or less upsetting. Anyone listening was totally free in the choice. Not many would argue that the character and the action she described was anything less than lamentable. Such a role seen in a movie would be seen to be a bad guy. That it referred to an unnamed well-known person may meet with disagreement from those faithful to that person. Nevertheless, she is not to be criticized for having or expressing an opinion.
It wasn't a 1st amendment issue. Trump isn't even in government yet, criticizing him isn't illegal even when he is.
I think Streep is a good actress, the Osange County movie role was a remarkable performance. But these actors live in fantasy land, it's what they do. Their opinions come from a fantasy world, not the one I live in.
It most certainly is not a First Amendment issue. The manner, however, in which some people responded showed they were offended in an inappropriate way, forgetting what freedom is. Of course, the opinions of 'celebrities' of any sort are of debatable value. Trump himself is an example of 'celebrity' becoming something else. At the same time, what Streep described as a character does appear in the 'real' world, not just 'fantasy', and it is a type of character that, if we recognized it in one, would disapprove. Those who do not agree that it corresponds to the unnamed celebrity have a right to such an opinion. They would doubtless not approve of it in another celebrity in whom they did identify it.