I doubt it is litigated. Braun pulled back the ad, slapped the disclaimer on it, and then republished it. In fact, that type of statutory requirement is the least restrictive means the CA judge was referring to re the deep fakes.Maybe. It will be interesting to see if it's litigated and, if so, how that turns out.
Political ads are pretty famously exempted from federal truth in advertising laws. But candidates can sue for defamation.
1A jurisprudence is full of balancing, testing of other means, and burdens of proof based on the type of speech/restrictions at issue. It's not as black and white as a lot of people assume.