allegations in the indictment, which it must accept as true. E.g., United States v. Moore, 563 F.3d 583, 586 (7th Cir.2009). While the indictment should be tested solely by its sufficiency to charge an offense, regardless of the strength or weakness of the government’s case, if the allegations in the indictment are insufficient to state a violation of the governing statute, the court may dismiss. See United States v. Risk, 843 F.2d 1059, 1061 (7th Cir.1988). In the present case, the parties treat the question of whether the government’s allegations are sufficient to support a conviction under § 373 as one of law; neither side argues that further factual development is necessary. Therefore, I may properly determine whether the facts set forth in the indictment state an offense. See id. (<HOLDING>). B. Section 373 and the First Amendment The
recognizing that where material facts are undisputed the court only decides the application of relevant law holding that the district court was entitled to deference in its application of  4b12 of the sentencing guidelines in a case where the underlying facts were undisputed holding that an indictment could not be dismissed based on claim that testimony was hearsay and incompetent recognizing that an indictment may be dismissed in part holding that the district court properly dismissed an indictment where the parties argued the applicability of a statute based on a set of undisputed facts