A new 501(c)(4) group called the Committee for Truth in Politics Inc. (CTP) announced it has filed a lawsuit challenging Federal Election Commission (FEC) rules. CTP has been sponsoring television ads in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina criticizing Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) for his position on abortion related legislation. This lawsuit is similar to others filed recently by the group's lead attorney James Bopp challenging FEC rules that could restrict funding or require disclosure of those funding similar ads. They filed the lawsuit to seek protection against any future FEC investigation and enforcement action. CTP is requesting an injunction to allow them to run an ad titled "Basic Rights," which criticizes Obama's position on partial-birth abortion legislation. According to BNA Money and Politics ($$), the lawsuit also has a script for another ad, called "Tragic But True." Both ads ask viewers to call Obama and tell him to change his position on the issue. The lawsuit also challenges the FEC's policy of determining whether or not a group should be treated as a political action committee. The new lawsuit said the CTP ads may not be regulated because the Supreme Court held in the WRTL case that broadcast ads are constitutionally protected if they may reasonably be interpreted as something other than as "an appeal to vote for or against a specific candidate." The CTP ads contain no such appeal to vote; instead, they are grass roots lobbying ads on a public issue addressed to an incumbent public official, the lawsuit argued. Bopp also argued that, under WRTL's constitutional analysis, compelled disclosure of those funding this type of political message is unconstitutional. Meanwhile, last week, the FEC received an advisory opinion request from the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) regarding rules for proposed radio ads criticizing Obama. In the request, Bopp asked the FEC whether planned radio ads sponsored by the NRLC would be considered "express advocacy" under FEC regulations and if the ads would be deemed "susceptible of no reasonable interpretation other than as appeal to vote for or against a particular candidate."