ThinkProgress: “‘Forbidding a candidate to speak ‘in favor of’ a political organization,’ Thapar wrote, is not permitted by the First Amendment. ‘And under the Supreme Court’s precedents, direct speech and monetary speech are functional equivalents,’ he continued, this time citing the Court’s Citizens United decision.
“‘Thus, there is simply no difference between ‘saying’ that one supports an organization by using words and ‘saying’ that one supports an organization by donating money. Put more plainly, if a candidate can speak the words ‘I support the Democratic Party,’ then he must likewise be allowed to put his money where his mouth is.’
“This analysis isn’t just wrong — it is obviously wrong under well-established Supreme Court precedent.”