Why do some argue that top-down causation supports the existence of free will?

I don't understand why people associate the concept of top-down causation with arguments about free will. So far, the rationale I have gathered is as follows.

Top-down causation is the concept that higher-level structures, patterns, or systems influence and control the behavior of lower-level components within a complex system. In this framework, the overall organization, goals, or functions of a system dictate the behavior of its individual parts, rather than that behavior being solely determined by the properties of those parts themselves, which would be an example of bottom-up causation. Top-down causation emphasizes that emergent properties of a system can exert causal control over the elements from which they arise. For example, the solid structure of a wheel exerts top-down control over its components, while the liquidity of water confers properties—such as fluidity—that individual water molecules do not possess.

How does this relate to free will? The argument I frequently encounter is as follows.

Top-down causation supposedly provides an explanation for how high-level brain states can influence lower-level neuronal processes in the brain and/or other processes in the body. If top-down causation holds true, then our thoughts, goals, and decisions (which exist at a higher, emergent level of our brain) can causally affect the neural activity and biochemical processes (the lower-level physical components) that drive our actions. This perspective supposedly challenges a purely reductionist view, which asserts that behavior is solely determined by the interactions of neurons and molecules and, thereby, leaves room for genuine free will.

I don't have an issue with top-down causation, but I can't see why it introduces any sort of freedom of choice. No more and no less than the solid structure of a wheel exerting a top-down control over its components, confers it the freedom to spin wherever it likes, or the liquidity of water influencing the dynamics of individual water molecules makes it free to flow wherever it likes.

I'm not arguing against or in favor of A) top-down causation; neither am I arguing in favor of nor against B) free will. I simply can't wrap my head around the idea that A) has anything to do with B). Can anyone help?