The Supreme Court will not hear an appeal from Citizens United, which is requesting a challenge to campaign finance rules that require disclosure of those paying for political ads in the weeks before an election (Citizens United v. FEC). The Supreme Court's decision upholds a lower court ruling that denied the group a preliminary injunction and found that the ads Citizens United wanted to air advertising its documentary Hillary: The Movie, constitute as "electioneering communications." Therefore the group must disclose who funded the ads. Citizens United argues that the ads should be considered issue speech instead. On February 29, the Supreme Court requested new briefs that responded to the question of whether the Court had jurisdiction over the case or if the case has to be first appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals. This recent news is the Court's decision that they do not have jurisdiction. However, the case is not over. BNA Money and Politics ($$) reports that James Bopp, the attorney representing Citizens United, "is still in district court pursuing a resolution of the case, and if an appeal failed in the lower courts, he would once again bring the case up for Supreme Court review. [. . .] The legal team behind Citizens United considers this a novel and important issue and plans to stick with the case."