[Tam says, "No, that's not what I said." She sees a fight coming, though, and you should read her blog for her take on it.]
Certainly DD and many bloggers see this as a First Amendment thing, same as EFF and three lines of encryption software.
Me, not so much. ITAR comes spilling into my world at lot more over electronics issues than guns, things like microwave components and equipment. RADAR. You go to buy a traveling-wave tube or some damn thing and you have to swear six was from Sunday you're not a furriner, not acting on a furriner's behalf and not gonna sell the thing you buy to furriners, not nohow ever -- and then you still have to trot out your bona fides and references before they'll talk you you about anything but the weather. Then, once you get the thing, if you let a furriner look at the documentation? It's a crime!
Sometimes this gets challenged and in general, the courts look at it, see "Arms" and next thing you know, it's not strict scrutiny as a First Amendment case, nooope, it's that icky Second Amendment, and you're arguing under "rational basis" evaluation. Not always; but when there's a real gun-type gun involved? Ouch.
It's not unwinnable but it's not a slam-dunk, either. They're going to need a good lawyer -- or several -- and deep pockets. Remember that when they start passing the hat. Can't win at all if you're not in the fight.
Just remember, it's a fight with the ITAR baby and there's no briar patch handy.