I meant: is it correct…
But if he has the status of a heretic, then it would be forbidden to associate with him or love him and so on, no?

He is coerced by his beliefs. No sanctions apply to him.

If that is considered coerced, then what counts as intentional…
And associating with heretics and loving them apparently is not a matter of sanctions and the like, but because his status is like that of a gentile, no?

An intentional sinner is someone who knows his Master and transgresses either out of spite or out of desire.
All of this is sanctions, even toward gentiles. And the proof is that according to Meiri, when gentiles conduct themselves properly (are bound by the norms of the nations), none of this applies to them.

With God's help, 7 Shevat 5784

To the father — greetings,

When a son is in trouble, even if he bears some contributory blame, a father's way is to make every effort to rescue him. All the more so when the son is in spiritual distress. And in our generation, when our situation is not simple, both materially and spiritually, it is not easy to hold on to faith against all the trials.

And the Chazon Ish already instructed—and experience plainly shows—that drawing him close with patience and love is the most effective remedy. And even if the effect is not noticeable in the short term, closeness and love have healing power. And we can learn this from the word of God through the last of the prophets, Malachi, who opens his sharp rebuke to his people with: “I have loved you.”

With blessings, Fish"l

And for further reading—
see the article by Rabbi Dan Tiumkin, “7 Tips for Coping with Challenging Youth,” on the "Together" website.

On the guidance of the gaon Rabbi Gershon Edelstein to act with “respect and friendliness” toward a son who has strayed from the path, see column 490, “The ‘Respect and Friendliness’ Approach — A Look at the Attitude Toward Those Who Leave Religion,” on this site. Sources for his approach, from Aaron the Priest to the Chazon Ish, I noted in my comments “What’s Surprising?” and those following it, in that same column.

With blessings, Fish"l

You wrote that all of this is sanctions and that he is coerced by his beliefs. In your opinion, are the laws stated regarding a heretic and an apikores only a matter of punishment, or are they also about fear of negative influence? That seems to be what Maimonides says in the laws of idolatry (chapter 10, law 1), where he writes that it is a commandment to destroy a sectarian and an apikores because they turn the people away from God. If so, why does it matter whether he is coerced by his beliefs or not? If in the end he has a negative influence, one should keep away from him.

Maybe one should keep away, but that does not justify killing him or not saving him. And even keeping away is a policy, and policy needs to be examined for how well it fits each situation, period, and set of circumstances.

To Fish"l. Thank you.
Apparently all the above is only about the plague of those who leave religion because they have problems in general (that have nothing to do with religion), and their leaving is part of those problems (rebellion, attention, or even just the evil inclination). They were not speaking about our case.

To the Rabbi, please (sorry for the trouble), where is the Meiri?

In dozens of places in his novellae on the Talmud. See my article “Is There an ‘Enlightened’ Idolatry?” here on the site.