Ned Foley has posted this interesting comment on the Moritz election law website. He offers a proposed test to separate genuine issue advocacy from electioneering for courts to apply on remand: “Thus, on remand, the standard for defining the scope of the carve-out should go something like this: after considering an advertisement’s overall content as well as the public context in which it was broadcast, if – but only if – it would be unreasonable to view the ad as containing an implicit electoral message, then the ad is constitutionally entitled to an exemption from BCRA’s source-of-funding restriction.”