On Monday, the State of Alaska filed an important legal brief setting forth a bold argument forself-government as a theory for limiting out-of-state money in local and state election campaigns. The state’s lawyers discussed the case with Free Speech For People while developing the brief, and we’d like to highlight this aspect of the argument….his argument draws support from a little-reported Supreme Court decision just two years afterCitizens United. The case of Bluman v. FEC involved a federal law prohibiting foreign nationals from contributing or spending money in federal, state, or local elections. Two Canadians in the U.S. on temporary visas challenged the prohibition—after all, Citizens United had just a year before waxed poetic about how a ban on corporate political spending violated the prohibition against “distinguishing among different speakers, allowing speech by some but not others” and thereby “deprive[d] the public of the right and privilege to determine for itself what speech and speakers are worthy of consideration.” If corporations can spend unlimited money in elections, why couldn’t Mr. Bluman spend a few bucks to “print flyers supporting President Obama’s reelection and to distribute them in Central Park”?