> Do you expect me to answer 'no'?
Only if you know anything about the history of campaign finance regulation and First Amendment jurisprudence in the U.S., which I guess you do not.
Only if you know anything about the history of campaign finance regulation and First Amendment jurisprudence in the U.S., which I guess you do not.
Of course it does follow. If you look at how the FEC regulates campaigns, they do so by creating intricate and/or vague rules, which they can subsequently enforce against any speakers or type of speech within their purview. When any government agency is allowed to regulate something, they are given a great deal of deference by the courts and the legislature, this administrative discretion "necessarily allow[s] the FEC to selectively silence any group or type of speech they dislike".