If a 1st Amendment privilege was raised, the burden on the Plaintiffs would be high to show their need for this information. In this case, the court said, to prove their point about bias the pPaintiffs could rely on expert testimony and about evidence of the campaign tactics that were visibly deployed by the Proponents. There was no need to delve into and seek disclosure about internal communications concerning strategies and arguments that never saw the light of day. Although the court conceded that Walker had correctly concluded that the Rule 26 standard was met, it concluded that the more stringent necessity test had not been met. There were other ways for Plaintiffs to get the necessary information before the court at trial without compelling disclosure of documents that could chill future political activity.