States have different laws on whether foreign individuals, businesses, or entities can make contributions to candidates, ballot measure campaigns, political parties, and other political groups.
Federal law prohibits candidates from soliciting, directing, or receiving contributions from foreign individuals or entities in connection with any federal, state, or local election. Federal statutes define a foreign individual as someone who is not a citizen or permanent resident of the United States. The Federal Election Campaign Act defines a foreign principal as a foreign government, political party, corporation, organization, or other group whose principal place of business is in a foreign country.[1]
The United States Supreme Court has upheld federal laws prohibiting foreign nationals from making contributions to candidates. In the 2011 case Bluman v. FEC, the court held, "It is fundamental to the definition of our national political community that foreign citizens do not have a constitutional right to participate in, and thus may be excluded from, activities of democratic self-government."[2]
Courts have held that the federal ban does not apply to issue advocacy, such as lobbying, and the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that issue advocacy and spending on ballot measure campaigns are similar. Accordingly, the Federal Election Commission has affirmed that foreign individuals, corporations, and governments can contribute to ballot measure campaigns.[3]
Laws addressing foreign contributions to candidate and ballot measure campaigns vary by state.
This section examines federal law on foreign funding in U.S. elections.
This section provides details about state laws governing foreign contributions to candidates
This section provides details about state laws governing foreign contributions to ballot measures
This section provides a history on the development of state and federal laws restricting foreign funding in elections across the United States.
This section details the arguments in favor of and opposed to restrictions on foreign funding in American elections.
This section lists state legislation dealing with restrictions on campaign contributions from foreign entities.
This section lists statewide ballot measures dealing with campaign contributions from foreign sources.
Federal law on foreign funding
The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA) replaced existing federal campaign finance laws and required campaigns to file quarterly disclosure reports of contributions and expenditures.[4] The law also "provided the basic legislative framework for separate segregated funds," more commonly known as political action committees.[5] In 1974, the Federal Election Campaign Act was amended to impose contribution and spending limits on campaigns and to forbid contributions to candidates from foreign nationals.
Under Title 52, Section § 30121:[6]
| “ | § 30121. Contributions and donations by foreign nationals
|
” |
The 1974 amendments also established the Federal Election Commission as "an independent agency to assume the administrative functions previously divided between congressional officers and the General Accounting Office."[8] Section § 110.20 of Title 11 of FEC regulations address contributions from foreign individuals and entities:[9]
| “ |
(b) Contributions and donations by foreign nationals in connection with elections.
|
” |
State laws
As of February 2026, 12 states had state-level prohibitions on foreign contributions to candidates, in addition to what is included in federal law. Six states had prohibitions on donations regarding ballot measures from foreign individuals and groups. Seventeen states had prohibitions on donations to candidates and ballot measures. Two states had a prohibition on foreign groups making independent expenditures. Thirteen states have no state-level prohibitions on foreign donations.
State laws on foreign contributions to candidates
As of February 2026, 29 states had additional laws governing campaign contributions to candidates from foreign individuals or entities beyond what exists in federal statute.
As of February 2026, 19 of those states had prohibitions that applied to three groups: foreign individuals, foreign governments, and foreign corporations. Two states, Maine and Arkansas, had a prohibition that applied to two of those groups. Eight states had prohibitions that applied to one of those groups.
The map and table below show state laws that further regulate (beyond existing federal law) candidate contributions from foreign individuals or entities as of February 2026.
| State | Does state law prohibit foreign campaign contributions? | Relevant provisions | Statute | Year of enactment | Regulated contribution types |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | No | — | — | — | — |
| Alaska | Yes | "A foreign-influenced corporation or foreign national may not, directly or indirectly, in connection with an election under this chapter, make a contribution or expenditure or make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or expenditure." | Alaska Statute 15.13.068 | 2010 | Direct and indirect |
| Arizona | No | — | — | — | — |
| Arkansas | Yes | "Campaign contributions may not be made by individuals who are not citizens of the United States or by any other entity which is not organized, existing, or created under the laws of the United States or of any state or other place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and which does not have its principal place of business in the United States." | A.C.A. § 7-6-205 | 1999 | Direct |
| California | Yes | "A foreign government or foreign principal shall not make, directly or through any other person, a contribution, expenditure, or independent expenditure in connection with the qualification or support of, or opposition to, any state or local ballot measure or in connection with the election of a candidate to state or local office." | California Code §85320 | 2001 | Direct and indirect |
| Colorado | Yes | "No limited liability company shall make any contribution to a candidate committee or political party if one or more of the individual members of the limited liability company is:...(III) A natural person who is not a citizen of the United States; (IV) A foreign government." | Colorado Revised Statutes 1-45-103.7(5)(a) | 2012 | Direct |
| Connecticut | Yes | "The following persons shall be guilty of illegal practices and shall be punished in accordance with the provisions of section 9-623:...(17) Any foreign national that makes, directly or indirectly, (A) any contribution or any express or implied promise to make a contribution, or (B) any expenditure; or (18) Any person who solicits, accepts or receives any contribution or covered transfer from a foreign national." | General Statutes of Connecticut 9-622 (17-18) | 2024 | Direct and indirect |
| Delaware | No | — | — | — | — |
| Florida | Yes | "A foreign national may not make or offer to make, directly or indirectly, a contribution or expenditure in connection with any election held in the state." | Florida Statutes 106.08(12)(b) | 2022 | Direct and indirect |
| Georgia | No | — | — | — | — |
| Hawaii | Yes | "Contributions by foreign national or foreign corporation prohibited. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), no contributions or expenditures shall be made to or on behalf of a candidate, candidate committee, or noncandidate committee, by a foreign national or foreign corporation, including a domestic subsidiary of a foreign corporation, a domestic corporation that is owned by a foreign national, or a local subsidiary where administrative control is retained by the foreign corporation, and in the same manner prohibited under 2 United States Code section 441e and 11 Code of Federal Regulations section 110.20, as amended. (b) A foreign-owned domestic corporation may make contributions if: (1) Foreign national individuals do not participate in election-related activities, including decisions concerning contributions or the administration of a candidate committee or noncandidate committee; or (2) The contributions are domestically-derived." | Hawaii Revised Statutes §11-356 | 2010 | Direct |
| Idaho | Yes | "A foreign national shall not make a contribution, directly or indirectly, to any candidate, political committee, or measure or make electioneering communications or independent expenditures." | Idaho Statutes 67-6610D(1) | 2021 | Direct and indirect |
| Illinois | No | — | — | — | — |
| Indiana | Yes | "A foreign national (as defined in 52 U.S.C. 30121(b)) may not make a contribution in connection with: (1) an election; (2) a convention; or (3) a caucus in which a candidate is selected; under this title." | Indiana Code 3-9-2-11 | 1995 | Direct |
| Iowa | Yes | "As provided in Federal Election Commission regulation 11 CFR 110.20, a foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make a monetary or in-kind contribution, or specifically promise to make a contribution, in connection with a state or local campaign or election in Iowa. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make a contribution to a candidate or to a campaign committee organized under Iowa Code chapter 68A." | Iowa Code 351-4.28 (68A) | 2010 | Direct and indirect |
| Kansas | No | — | — | — | — |
| Kentucky | No | — | — | — | — |
| Louisiana | Yes | "No foreign national shall, directly or through any other person, make any contribution of money or other thing of value, or promise expressly or impliedly, any such contribution, in connection with an election to any political office or in connection with any primary election, convention, or caucus held to select candidates for any political office; nor shall any person solicit, accept, or receive any such contribution from such foreign national." | LA Revised Statutes §1505.2(M)(1) | 1997 | Direct and indirect |
| Maine | Yes | "A foreign government-influenced entity may not make, directly or indirectly, a contribution, expenditure, independent expenditure, electioneering communication or any other donation or disbursement of funds to influence the nomination or election of a candidate or the initiation or approval of a referendum." | Maine Revised Statutes §1064 (2) | 2023 | Direct and indirect |
| Maryland | No | — | — | — | — |
| Massachusetts | No | — | — | — | — |
| Michigan | Yes | "An officer, director, stockholder, attorney, agent, or any other person acting for a labor organization, a domestic dependent sovereign, or a corporation or joint stock company, whether incorporated under the laws of this or any other state or foreign country, except corporations formed for political purposes, shall not make a contribution or expenditure or provide volunteer personal services that are excluded from the definition of acontribution under section 4(3)(a)" | Michigan Statutes 169.254(2) | 1976 | Indirect |
| Minnesota[10] | Yes | "(a) Notwithstanding subdivisions 3 and 4, a foreign-influenced corporation must not:...(3) make a contribution to a candidate for nomination, election, or appointment to a public office or to a candidate's principal campaign committee." | Minnesota 211B.15 Subd4A | 2022 | Direct |
| Mississippi | Yes | "It shall be unlawful for a foreign national, directly or through any other person, to make any contribution or any expenditure of money or other thing of value, or to promise expressly or impliedly to make any such contribution or expenditure, in connection with an election to any political office or in connection with any primary election, convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office." | Mississippi Code 23-15-819 | 2017 | Direct and indirect |
| Missouri | Yes | "No campaign committee, candidate committee, continuing committee, exploratory committee, political party committee, and political party shall knowingly accept contributions from:...(b) A foreign government; or (c) Any foreign corporation that does not have the authority to transact business in this state pursuant to chapter 347, RSMo, as amended from time to time." | Missouri Constitution Article 8, Section 23(16) | 2016 | Direct |
| Montana | Yes | "It is unlawful for a foreign national, directly or through an intermediary, to make a disbursement for an electioneering communication, a contribution, or an expenditure, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or an expenditure, in connection with any candidate election." | Montana Code 13-37-502 | 2019 | Direct and indirect |
| Nebraska | No | — | — | — | — |
| Nevada | Yes | "A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make a contribution or a commitment to make a contribution to: (a) A candidate." | Nevada Revised Statutes 294A.325 | 2011 | Direct and indirect |
| New Hampshire | Yes | "No expenditure or use of a contribution, tangible or intangible, shall be made for the purpose of promoting the success or defeat of any political party, measure or candidate:...VI. By any foreign national, as defined in 52 U.S.C. section 30121(b) and 11 C.F.R. section 110.20(a)(3), for any purpose, including for the use of telephones, facsimile machines, vehicles, and computers, for electioneering. For the purposes of this paragraph, 'electioneering' means to act in any way specifically designed to influence the vote of a voter on any question or office." | New Hampshire Statutes 664:5 | 2018 | Direct |
| New Jersey[11] | No | — | — | — | — |
| New Mexico | Yes | "Contributions and donations may not be solicited, accepted, received from, or made directly or indirectly by, foreign nationals who do not have permanent residence in the United States." | New Mexico Administrative Code 1.10.13.22(F) | 2017 | Direct and indirect |
| New York[12] | No | — | — | — | — |
| North Carolina | Yes | "No candidate, political committee, political party, affiliated party committee, or treasurer shall accept any contribution made by any corporation, foreign or domestic, regardless of NC General Statutes - Chapter 163 Article 22A 26 whether such corporation does business in the State of North Carolina, or made by any business entity, labor union, professional association, or insurance company." | NC General Statutes 163‑278.15(a) | 2018 | Direct |
| North Dakota | Yes | "Governments of foreign countries, foreign nationals not lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States, and corporations organized under the laws of or having their principal place of business in a foreign country, are prohibited from making contributions or expenditures in connection with any statewide election, election for the legislative assembly, or statewide ballot-issue election." | North Dakota Constitution Article XIV, Section 2(6) | 2018 | Direct |
| Ohio | Yes | "No foreign national shall, directly or indirectly through any person or entity, do any of the following: (1) Make a contribution, expenditure, or independent expenditure in support of or opposition to a candidate for any elective office in this state, including an office of a political party." | Ohio Revised Code 3517.121 | 2024 | Direct and indirect |
| Oklahoma | No | — | — | — | — |
| Oregon | No[13] | — | — | — | — |
| Pennsylvania | Yes | "It is unlawful for any National or State bank, or any corporation, incorporated under the laws of this or any other state or any foreign country or any unincorporated association, except those corporations formed primarily for political purposes or as a political committee, to make a contribution or expenditure in connection with the election of any candidate or for any political purpose whatever except in connection with any question to be voted on by the electors of this Commonwealth." | PA Election Code Section 1633 | 1937 | Direct |
| Rhode Island | Yes | "It shall be unlawful for any corporation, whether profit or non-profit, domestic corporation or foreign corporation, as defined in § 7-1.2-106, or other business entity to make any campaign contribution or expenditure, as defined in § 17-25-3, to or for any candidate, political action committee, or political party committee, or for any candidate, political action committee, or political party committee to accept any campaign contribution or expenditure from a corporation or other business entity." | R.I. Gen. Laws § 17-25-10.1(h)(1) | 1992 | Direct |
| South Carolina | No | — | — | — | — |
| South Dakota | Yes | "No candidate or political committee may accept any contribution from any state, state agency, political subdivision of the state, foreign government, federal agency, or the federal government. A violation of this section is a Class 2 misdemeanor. A subsequent offense within a calendar year is a Class 1 misdemeanor." | South Dakota Codified Laws 12-27-21 | 2007 | Direct |
| Tennessee | No | — | — | — | — |
| Texas | No | — | — | — | — |
| Utah | No | — | — | — | — |
| Vermont | No | — | — | — | — |
| Virginia | No | — | — | — | — |
| Washington | Yes | "A foreign national may not make a contribution to any candidate or political committee, make an expenditure in support of or in opposition to any candidate or ballot measure, or sponsor political advertising or an electioneering communication." | Revised Code of Washington 42.17A.417 | 2020 | Direct |
| West Virginia | Yes | "A foreign national may not, directly or indirectly, make: (1) A contribution or donation, or an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, to a candidate’s committee, a political committee, or a political party; or (2) An independent expenditure or any disbursement for an electioneering communication related to a state or local election." | West Virginia Code §3-8-5g | 2019 | Direct and indirect |
| Wisconsin | Yes | "No person may make or accept a contribution, make a disbursement, make an expenditure, or incur an obligation in violation of 11 CFR 110.20 and 52 USC 30121." | Wisconsin Code 11.1208(4) | 2015 | Direct |
| Wyoming | No | — | — | — | — |
State laws on foreign contributions to ballot measures
Thirteen states with prohibitions had Republican trifectas at the time of enactment, six states had divided government, and one state had a Democratic trifecta. Three states enacted their prohibition via ballot measure.
As of February 2026, 20 states had a prohibition on contributions from three categories: foreign groups, individuals, and corporations. One state, Maine, has prohibitions on two of those three groups, and two states, Minnesota and South Dakota, had a prohibition on one of the three groups.
The following table compares bans on foreign spending in ballot measure campaigns by state. The table categorizes the contributions covered as either direct or direct and indirect. Direct and indirect contributions include those received directly from the foreign individual or entity, as well as contributions from intermediaries such as independent expenditure committees.
States where foreign principal or foreign national are bolded use the same definition as federal law for those terms. Federal law defines foreign nationals as:[15]
- (a) a foreign principal, which includes:
- (i) a foreign government or political party or
- (ii) an individual, partnership, association, corporation, organization, or any other combination of individuals organized under the laws of or having its principal place of business in a foreign country.
- (b) an individual who is not a citizen of the United States or a U.S. national and who is not a lawful permanent resident.
| State | Year of enactment | Statute | Who the law applies to | Regulated contribution types |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arkansas | 2025 | Arkansas Code, § 7-9 | Persons who are not citizens or lawful permanent residents; foreign governments; foreign political parties; and entities organized under the laws or with principal place of business in a foreign country | Direct and indirect |
| California | 1997 | California Code, Government Code - GOV § 85320 | Foreign governments, foreign principals, foreign national, and domestic subsidiary of a foreign corporation if the decision to contribute to a ballot measure campaign is made by a management employee of the foreign corporation who is neither a U.S. citizen nor a U.S. permanent resident. Foreign national is defines as "a person who is not a citizen of the United States and who is not a lawfully admitted permanent resident." | Direct and indirect |
| Colorado | 2002 | Article XXVIII, Colorado Constitution | Non-U.S. citizens, foreign governments, and any foreign corporation that does not have the authority to do business in Colorado | Direct |
| Florida | 2022 | Florida Statutes 106.08(12)(b) | Foreign national | Direct and indirect |
| Idaho | 2021 | Idaho Statutes 67-6610D(1) | Foreign national | Direct and indirect |
| Indiana | 2025 | Indiana Code Title 3 | Foreign national | Direct |
| Kansas | 2025 | Kansas Statutes Annotated 25-4180 | Non-U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents; foreign governments; foreign political parties; entities organized under foreign laws; U.S.-based entities that are wholly or majority owned by foreign nationals, with exceptions | Direct and indirect |
| Kentucky | 2025 | Kentucky Revised Statutes 121 | Non-U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents; foreign governments; foreign political parties; entities organized under foreign laws; U.S.-based entities that are wholly or majority owned by foreign nationals, with exceptions | Direct and indirect |
| Louisiana | 2025 | Louisiana Revised Statutes § 18:1505.2 | Non-U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents; foreign governments; foreign political parties; and entities formed under foreign laws or based in a foreign country, unless authorized to do business in Louisiana | Direct and indirect |
| Maine | 2023 | 21-A Maine Revised Statutes §1064 (Question 2) | Foreign governments, including entities with partial (5% or more equity stake) foreign government ownership or control | Direct and indirect |
| Maryland | 2017 | Annotated Code of Maryland, Election Law § 13-236.1 | Foreign principal | Direct and indirect |
| Missouri | 2025 | Revised Statutes of Missouri § 130 | Foreign national defined as Non-U.S. citizens or non-lawful permanent residents; foreign governments; foreign political parties; entities organized under foreign laws or with their principal place of business in a foreign country; U.S.-organized entities that are wholly or majority owned by foreign nationals, with exceptions | Direct and indirect |
| Minnesota | 2022 | Minnesota 211B.15 Subd4A | Foreign corporation or investor | Direct |
| Montana | 2025 | Montana Code Annotated § 13-37-501, 13-37-502, AND 13-37-503 | Foreign national defined as a non-U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident, foreign government, foreign political party, an entity organized under the laws of a foreign country or has its place of business in a foreign country, and any U.S. entity wholly or majority owned by any foreign national, unless the entity's employees pay state income tax and the entity pays state property taxes or ballot measure contributions are derived entirely from funds generated by its U.S. operations and are made by individuals who are U.S. citizens or permanent residents. | Direct and indirect |
| Nebraska | 2022 | Nebraska Revised Statute 49-1479.03 | Foreign national defined as a person who is not a U.S. citizen or national and who is not lawfully admitted for permanent residence; a person, other than an individual, organized under the laws of or having its principal place of business in a foreign country; a government of a foreign country; or a political party or political committee established in a foreign country. | Direct and indirect |
| Nevada | 2011 | Nevada Revised Statutes 294A.325 | Foreign national | Direct and indirect |
| New Hampshire | 2018 | New Hampshire Statutes 664:5 | Foreign national | Direct |
| North Dakota | 2018 | Article XIV, North Dakota Constitution | Foreign national defined as a foreign government; foreign political party; foreign corporation, partnership, association, organization, or other entities organized under the laws of or having its principal place of business in a foreign country; foreign citizens; or a person who is not a U.S. citizen or national and has not been lawfully admitted to reside permanently in the U.S. | Direct |
| Ohio | 2024 | Ohio Revised Code Section 3517.121 | Foreign national defined as a person who is not a U.S. citizen; a foreign government or political subdivision; a foreign political party; or a person that is organized under the laws of or has its principal place of business in a foreign country | Direct and indirect |
| South Dakota | 2007 | South Dakota Codified Laws 12-27-21 | Foreign government | Direct |
| Tennessee | 2025 | Tennessee Code Annotated 2-10-501 | Foreign national | Direct and indirect |
| Washington | 2020 | Revised Code of Washington 42.17A.417 | Foreign national defined as a person who is not a U.S. citizen or national; a foreign government or political subdivision; a foreign political party; or a person that is organized under the laws of or has its principal place of business in a foreign country | Direct |
| Wyoming | 2025 | Wyoming Statutes 22‑24‑202 and 22‑25‑116 | Foreign national | Direct and indirect |
History of foreign funding restrictions in the United States
Federal restrictions on foreign involvement in U.S. elections date back to the 1938 Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), according to Lori Ringhand, a professor at the University of Georgia School of Law.[16] According to Ringhand, FARA required foreign principals involved in politics to "disclose their connections with foreign governments, foreign political parties and other foreign principals."[16] In 1966, Congress expanded these requirements to include an explicit prohibition on giving or receiving campaign donations from foreign nationals.[16] That prohibition was further expanded in amendments to the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), which were enacted in 1974. You can read more about FECA and its provisions on foreign national donations here. Finally, the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) expanded the prohibition to include an "expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication."[16]
In Bluman v. FEC (2011), the United States Supreme Court upheld a lower court's ruling that said FECA prohibits foreign contributions to political candidates and that this prohibition is constitutional. The court found that "It is fundamental to the definition of our national political community that foreign citizens do not have a constitutional right to participate in, and thus may be excluded from, activities of democratic self-government."[17] Federal courts have invalidated some state-level prohibitions on foreign contributions, while upholding others.
Pennsylvania became the first state to enact a law banning foreign campaign contributions to candidates in 1937. In 1997, California became the first state to ban foreign contributions for ballot measures.
See below for a timeline of key events related to prohibitions on foreign contributions in reverse chronological order.
- 2025
Nine states — Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Tennessee, and Wyoming — enact prohibitions on foreign contributions for ballot measures, the most of any year to date.
- July 14, 2025
The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit struck down a law enacted by Maine voters in 2023 that prohibited foreign contributions to candidates and ballot measures.
- 2018
Three states — New Hampshire, North Carolina, and North Dakota — enact laws or constitutional amendments prohibiting foreign contributions to candidates, the joint-most of any year to date.
- 2011
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling that said FECA prohibits foreign contributions to political candidates and that this prohibition is constitutional.
- 2010
Three states — Alaska, Hawaii, and Iowa — enact laws prohibiting campaign contributions from foreign entities to candidates, the joint-most of any year to date.
Arguments for and against prohibiting foreign campaign contributions
Supporting arguments
Supporters of prohibiting foreign contributions to candidates and ballot measures argue that the laws protect democratic self-governance for a state's residents, prevent overt foreign influence of public policy in the United States, and protect the country's national security.
Foreign funding bans help protect democratic self-governance for the residents of a state or country
In arguing in favor of Maine's ban on foreign contributions to candidates and ballot measures, Tara Malloy, the senior director for appellate litigation and strategy at the Campaign Legal Center, said that "Mainers deserve a government that is responsive to them, not foreign interests."[18] The Campaign Legal Center calls itself "a nonpartisan legal organization dedicated to solving the wide range of challenges facing American democracy."[19]
“By barring entities owned or influenced by foreign governments from spending to influence state elections, Question 2 empowers Maine voters, restores their right to democratic self-governance and reduces the power of wealthy special interests,” Malloy said.
In testimony in support of Ohio legislation banning contributions to candidates and ballot measure committees, Catherine Gunsalus of Heritage Action argued that the measure was important for ensuring that Ohio policy decisions reflected the will of the state's residents.[20] Heritage Action's website said its mission is "restoring human flourishing through self-governance for all Americans and championing the policies that get us there."[21]
"Prohibiting foreign nationals from contributing to ballot issue campaigns ensures Ohioans’ voices are not diluted, and decisions about Ohio’s Constitution and laws are based on the voices of its citizens — not foreign billionaires,” Gunsalus said.
Foreign funding bans help prevent overt foreign influence on American public policy
In a press release announcing legislation to ban foreign contributions in state and local ballot measures, U.S. Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R) argued the provision was necessary to prevent foreign influence in American politics.[22]
"Foreign nationals have no place influencing our laws, our ballots, or our future," Fitzpatrick said. "Whether it’s a presidential race or a local referendum, every taxpayer-funded election must be protected from foreign interference. This bipartisan legislation closes a dangerous loophole and sends a clear message: our democracy is not for sale."
New York State Sen. Michael Gianaris (D) and state Rep. Latrice Walker (D) said in an op-ed that they supported a bill banning state and local contributions from certain corporations deemed to be foreign-influenced. The legislators argued it would close a loophole in federal law created by the U.S. Supreme Court's 2010 Citizens United v. FEC case, which they said made it easier for corporations owned by foreign groups to influence the state's politics.[23]
"Every day this loophole remains open, public confidence in our elections is undermined," Gianaris and Walker said. "Closing it would send a clear message: New York’s democracy shall not be undermined by foreign-influenced corporations."
Foreign funding bans protect U.S. national security
In opposing a 2025 lawsuit challenging Kansas' ban on foreign contributions to ballot measure campaigns, Caitlin Sutherland, executive director of Americans for Public Trust, argued the provision was important to protect against donations from countries that might be adversarial to the U.S.[24] Americans for Public Trust's website calls itself a "nonpartisan, independent organization dedicated to ensuring that no politician or political group is above the law."[25]
“Without this law, there is nothing stopping other foreign-funded groups – or foreign adversaries like Russia, China, and others – from exerting large-scale financial influence in Kansas," Sutherland said. "This court should uphold this commonsense law to stop foreign meddling and close this foreign influence loophole.”
Opposing arguments
Opponents of prohibiting foreign contributions to candidates and ballot measures argue that the measures are unconstitutional, overly broad, and can punish citizens and lawful permanent residents.
Foreign contribution bans are unconstitutional and at odds with past court rulings
In 2023, Minnesota enacted a law that prevents entities who had one foreign investor with a 1% interest or multiple foreign investors holding 5% interest from making independent expenditures or candidate or ballot measure contributions. In an amicus brief opposing the law, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce argued it unconstitutionally chilled the free speech rights of certain corporations and was at odds with the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.[26] The U.S. Chamber of Commerce website said its mission is to "advocate, connect, inform, and fight for business growth and America’s success."[27]
"[The law's] thresholds for identifying supposedly foreign-influenced corporations are set so low that the provision can only be understood as a broad-based attack on corporate political speech rather than a targeted strike on foreign influence," the group wrote.
A lawsuit challenging Ohio's ban on foreign contributions to candidates and ballot measures argued it would “unconstitutionally impede public debate through the enforcement of new broad and sweeping prohibitions."[28]
"Because of HB 1, all noncitizens are now threatened with investigation, criminal prosecution, and mandatory fines if they even indicate they intend to engage in any election-related spending or contributions − including to support or oppose ballot questions in virtually any capacity," the lawsuit said.
Foreign contribution bans are overly broad and punish actors that are not actually controlled by foreign interests
In an amicus brief opposing Maine's law, the Institute for Free Speech argued that a provision considering companies that are 5% or more foreign government-owned as being foreign nationals was too broad.[29] The Institute for Free Speech's website said its mission is to defend "your First Amendment right to freedom of speech, press, assembly, and petition."[30]
"The label the Maine law places on American companies is misleading," the group wrote. "The law doesn’t require any actual foreign influence to bar an American company from educating customers and voters about how referenda impact it and them. The theoretical possibility of influence triggers the 'foreign-government influenced' label ... It also means law is patently over inclusive."
Bans on foreign contributions can impact U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents
After Kansas enacted a ban on foreign contributions to ballot measures, the group Kansans for Constitutional Freedom sued in 2025, arguing the law is unconstitutional. One of the provisions the group challenged was language requiring donors to affirm that they had not received a certain amount of funds from foreign nationals.[31] Kansans for Constitutional Freedom's website said it is "a bipartisan coalition of reproductive rights advocates and allied organizations committed to protecting the constitutional rights of Kansans and keeping abortion safe and legal."[32]
"KCF does not collect this information from its donors and the requirement that it engage in invasive questioning of any donor of the source of any funding that it has received for any purpose will directly hinder KCF’s ability to raise funds to engage in the advocacy central to its purpose," the lawsuit said. "There is no reason why a donor should have to provide detailed and confidential information about its own funding sources."
In 2024, Ohio enacted a ban on foreign contributions to candidates and ballot measures, including donations made by lawful permanent residents. Ohio state Rep. Michele Grim (D) argued in 2024 that her state's law "is really undermining the voice of Ohio voters and telling them that their voice doesn’t matter."[33]
“These are people who pay taxes, these are people who work here and contribute to society," Grim said.
State legislation
The table below lists bills related to foreign funding restrictions introduced during (or carried over to) each state's regular legislative session this year. The following information is included for each bill:
- State
- Bill number
- Official bill name or caption
- Most recent action date
- Legislative status
- Sponsor party
- Topics dealt with by the bill
Bills are organized by state and then by most recent action. The table displays up to 100 results. To view more bills, use the arrows in the upper-right corner. Clicking on a bill will open its page on Ballotpedia's Election Administration Legislation Tracker, which includes bill details and a summary.
Ballot measures
Ballotpedia tracked four ballot measures related to foreign contributions to ballot measures and candidates.
| State | Year | Measure | Type | Description | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maine | 2023 | Question 2 | IndISS | Prohibits foreign governments, or entities with at least 5% foreign government ownership or control, from spending money to influence ballot measures or candidate elections |  |
| North Dakota | 2018 | Measure 1 | CICA | Ban political contributions from foreign government entities, foreign individuals, and foreign corporations | |
| Missouri | 2016 | Constitutional Amendment 2 | CICA | Ban committees from accepting contributions from foreign corporations[34] | / |
| Colorado | 2002 | Amendment 27 | CICA | Prohibits candidate committees and political parties from making or accepting certain contributions | |
Noteworthy events
Injunction over Minnesota law prohibiting foreign donations (2025)
On February 7, 2025, Judge Eric Tostrud of the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota issued an order permanently enjoining provisions found in Minnesota Statute 211B.15. The Minnesota State Legislature passed the statute in 2023, prohibiting entities who had one foreign investor with a 1% interest or multiple foreign investors holding 5% interest from making independent expenditures or candidate contributions.[35]
The Minnesota Chamber of Commerce filed a lawsuit challenging the statute as unconstitutional and requesting a preliminary injunction shortly after it was enacted. The plaintiffs argued the law violated the First Amendment and was not sufficiently narrow in its scope. In his decision permanently enjoining the statute, Tostrud wrote, "The [attorneys for the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board] give no reason to think the challenged provisions, to the extent they address political contributions, survive exacting scrutiny."[36]
Explore election legislation with Ballotpedia
Try Ballotpedia's Election Administration Legislation TrackerBallotpedia's Election Administration Legislation Tracker provides daily updates on legislative activity related to election policy in all 50 states.
Our election policy experts translate complex bill text into easy-to-understand summaries. And because it's from Ballotpedia, our legislation tracker is guaranteed to be neutral, unbiased, and nonpartisan.
Read Ballotpedia's State of Election Administration Legislation ReportsBallotpedia publishes regular analysis of election administration legislation, including three full reports per year, providing ongoing coverage of legislative activity affecting election policy in each state.
These reports deliver insights into partisan priorities, dive deep into notable trends, and highlight activity in key states.
Subscribe to The Ballot BulletinThe Ballot Bulletin is a weekly email that delivers the latest updates on election policy.
The newsletter tracks developments in election policy around the country, including legislative activity, big-picture trends, and recent news. Each email contains in-depth data from our Election Administration Legislation Tracker.
See also
- Laws governing campaign contributions to candidates from foreign individuals or entities
- Laws governing foreign spending in ballot measure campaigns
Footnotes
- ↑ FEC, "Foreign Nationals," accessed February 11, 2026
- ↑ FEC, "Bluman v. FEC," accessed February 11, 2026
- ↑ Federal Election Commission, "MUR: 7523," accessed February 11, 2026
- ↑ FEC, "Campaign Finance Law: Disclosure and Disclaimer Requirements for Political Campaign Advertising," December 30, 2019
- ↑ FEC, "The Presidential Public Funding Program April 1993," accessed April 20, 2025
- ↑ U.S. Code, "Title 52 - Voting and Elections," accessed February 11, 2026
- ↑ 7.0 7.1 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ Ford Library Museum, "Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments - 1974," accessed April 29, 2025
- ↑ National Archives, "Code of Federal Regulations," accessed February 11, 2026
- ↑ Note: On February 7, 2025, a U.S. district court issued an order permanently enjoining certain provisions of Minnesota law related to candidate contributions from foreign sources.
- ↑ Note: New Jersey law prohibits foreign individuals or entities from forming independent expenditure committees or making independent expenditures, but does not explicitly prohibit contributions to candidates.
- ↑ Note: New York law prohibits foreign individuals or entities from forming independent expenditure committees or making independent expenditures, but does not explicitly prohibit contributions to candidates.
- ↑ In 2024, Oregon enacted a ban on foreign nationals, corporations, and entities making contributions to candidates. The provision takes effect on January 1, 2027
- ↑ Democracy Policy Network, "Foreign Investor Electioneering Ban," accessed October 19, 2023
- ↑ Legal Information Institute, Cornell University Law School, "52 U.S. Code § 30121 - Contributions and donations by foreign nationals," accessed June 14, 2024
- ↑ 16.0 16.1 16.2 16.3 University of Georgia School of Law, "Contextualizing Corruption: Foreign Financing Bans and Campaign Finance Law," January 1, 2023
- ↑ FEC, "Bluman v. FEC," accessed February 12, 2026
- ↑ Campaign Legal Center, "Defending the right of Maine voters to have elections free from foreign influence," February 23, 2024
- ↑ Campaign Legal Center, "About," accessed February 9, 2026
- ↑ Ohio Capital Journal, "Ohio Senate passes bill to stop foreign donations on ballot campaigns," March 4, 2024
- ↑ Heritage Action, "Homepage," accessed February 11, 2026
- ↑ Congressman Jared Golden, "Golden, Fitzpatrick reintroduce bill to ban foreign donations in state, local referendums," May 21, 2025
- ↑ New York Daily News, "New York must block foreign influence in elections," February 1, 2026
- ↑ The Center Square, "Watchdog groups back Kansas’ foreign‑money ban in court," June 24, 2025
- ↑ Americans for Public Trust, "About," accessed February 9, 2026
- ↑ U.S. Chamber of Commerce "Proposed amicus curae brief," August 2, 2024
- ↑ U.S. Chamber of Commerce, "About," accessed February 9, 2026
- ↑ Associated Press', "Lawsuit challenges Ohio law banning foreign nationals from donating to ballot campaigns," June 28, 2024
- ↑ Institute for Free Speech, "BRIEF OF INSTITUTE FOR FREE SPEECH AS AMICUS CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF APPELLEES," July 31, 2024
- ↑ Institute for Free Speech, "Your Rights," accessed February 9, 2025
- ↑ Sunflower State Journal, "COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF," May 16, 2025
- ↑ Kansans for Constitutional Freedom, "About," accessed February 11, 2026
- ↑ Ohio Capital Journal, "Federal judge blocks Ohio’s ban on foreign political donations," September 3, 2024
- ↑ The ban was ruled unconstitutional.
- ↑ Winthrop and Weinstine, "Minnesota Federal Judge Permanently Enjoins Enforcement of Minnesota’s 2023 Foreign Influence Campaign Finance Statute," February 7, 2025
- ↑ FindLaw, "MINNESOTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE v. CHOI (2025)," accessed May 12, 2025
