WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that states were free to let only their own citizens make requests under their freedom of information laws. The court also dismissed a case concerning the right to a speedy trial for poor criminal defendants, after it had been briefed and argued. And the court declined to consider a case concerning part of a tough 2011 Alabama immigration law, leaving in place an appeals court ruling blocking the law.

The lone decision issued Monday was in a case, McBurney v. Young, No. 12-17, brought by Roger Hurlbert, a California man who collects property records for commercial clients, and Mark McBurney, a Rhode Island man who once lived in Virginia and sought information concerning child support payments. They sued after Virginia refused to comply with their requests under its freedom of information law based on their citizenship.

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., writing for a unanimous court, said that provisions of the Constitution meant to ensure that citizens of different states are treated the same in many settings did not apply to what he called a noncommercial service whose fixed costs were borne by state taxpayers. Much of the information was available in other ways, he added. “Requiring noncitizens to conduct a few minutes of Internet research in lieu of using a relatively cumbersome state FOIA process,” he wrote, “cannot be said to impose any significant burden.”

Justice Alito wrote that at least seven other states had laws limiting requests for information to their citizens. The Virginia law contains an exception for representatives of newspapers and magazines with circulation in Virginia and of radio and television stations that broadcast there. It does not address Internet publications.