“Credited as being the intellectual architect of the arguments that persuaded the Supreme Court in Citizens United.” New York Times, May 12, 2013

“The Citizens United case was really Jim's brainchild. He has manufactured these cases to present certain questions to the Supreme Court in a certain order and achieve a certain result. He is a litigation machine.” New York Times, January 25, 2010

“In January 2008, James Bopp, BA ‘70, got laughed out of court – literally. The white-haired lawyer from Terre Haute, Ind., was appearing before a federal three-judge panel in Washington, D.C., to argue that his client, a small conservative nonprofit named Citizens United, should be able to air Hillary: The Movie on on-demand TV during the Democratic presidential primaries. . . . In court, Bopp argued that the movie wasn't so different from what you'd see on 60 Minutes, and its creators deserved First Amendment protections. At that point, U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lambert laughed out loud. “You can't compare this to 60 Minutes,” he said. “Did you read this transcript?” No one was laughing two years later, when the Supreme Court reversed Lambert's ruling and adopted many of Bopp's arguments – a decision that wiped out 100 years of precedent in campaign-finance law.” Indiana University Alumni Magazine, Fall 2012

“It took Jim Bopp and his allies eight years and three trips to the Supreme Court to knock down McCain-Feingold's obstacles to corporate and union money. But Bopp finally got what he wanted: in Citizens United, in 2010, the Court not only invalidated the McCain-Feingold restrictions, it tore out precedent by declaring that Austin had been wrongly decided. McCain-Feingold may have made history, but Citizens United went back and rewrote it.” The Atlantic, October 2012

“Citizens United was the culmination of years of work by Bopp to chip away at the nation's campaign-finance regulations, often via obscure cases no one expected him to win. But Bopp's not done – not by a long stretch. Today, the 64-year-old lawyer is pursuing challenges to dismantle practically every facet of campaign-finance regulation. Taken individually, many of those cases look just as preposterous and doomed as Citizens United did in 2008. But laugh at your peril.” Mother Jones, May/June 2011