James Bopp, Jr., the conservative First Amendment lawyer who argued Citizens United and is also representing the National Organization for Marriage in a number
“„The constitutional arguments we’re making do not depend on whether they’re truthful or not, but we arearguing that they are truthful. [...]
“„Our principle argument against the statue is that the government is empowering itself to decide the truth or falsity of information that’s related to elections. The way they’ve formulated the law is vague and not just related to express advocacy but also issue advocacy, and that’s unconstitutional.
“„When it comes to truth or falsehood we don’t believe it’s the role of the government to decide that such communications are true or false. That’s different from saying a false statement is protected under the First Amendment, of course, because truthful communications would be subject to the process just as false ones would be — they would be dragged though this whole process as well.