The Campaign Legal Center and Democracy 21 have filed a friend of the court brief, charging that the SpeechNow.org lawsuit "is about whether wealthy donors can each contribute hundreds of thousands, or indeed, millions of dollars to sophisticated committees often run by Washington political operatives, closely associated with parties and candidates, in order to finance campaign advocacy . . . [T]he Supreme Court has recognized that laws which prevent the circumvention of contribution limits thereby serve important governmental interests by protecting the integrity of the campaign finance laws." SpeechNow.org, a 527 organization who plans to advocate for the election of federal candidates who favor free political speech, has filed a lawsuit challenging federal campaign finance laws that prohibit contributions of more than $5,000 per year to political committees as an unconstitutional violation of free speech and association rights. In response, SpeechNow.org has filed a memo stating their opposition to the amicus. Bob Bauer at moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com considers this move a mistake on the part of SpeechNow. "SpeechNow, in short, has to engage with the issue, and win its case, on the level of constitutional principle and analysis, taking on all comers. This is why it is not the best of starts to attempt to dodge amici." Campaign Legal Center and Democracy 21 argue that 527s' "track record of serving as conduits for large donors seeking to avoid the limits on contributions to the political parties — limits that were recently enacted by Congress, and upheld by the Supreme Court, to shut down the corrupt soft money system. . . . The Supreme Court has recognized that laws which prevent the circumvention of contribution limits thereby serve important governmental interests by protecting the integrity of the campaign finance laws." One interesting argument made in the amicus is that because SpeechNow donors want to donate more than the allowed limit of up, to 5,000 per year, an amount larger than what most Americans can afford, the speech of the public will be hurt.