California Governor Gavin Newsom has signed into law a controversial privacy bill that critics are calling the “Stop Nick Shirley Act,” igniting concerns about potential First Amendment violations and prompting calls for federal intervention. The legislation, introduced by Democratic Assemblymember Mia Bonta, expands the state’s address-protection program to immigration-service workers.
Supporters of the law state that it is designed to protect immigration-service workers from threats and doxing. However, opponents argue that the bill's language could hinder journalists and independent investigators from their work, potentially impeding their ability to scrutinize government-funded programs and operations.
The law's informal moniker, the “Stop Nick Shirley Act,” refers to Nick Shirley, a citizen journalist known for investigating government programs and confronting workers at various facilities. Republican lawmakers in California have strongly criticized the bill, with some urging the U.S. Department of Justice to intervene before it takes effect.
"I ultimately believe that this has to go to court because clearly our politicians don’t give a damn about our First Amendment rights. But this is a bad pattern of behavior," said Republican Assemblymember Carl DeMaio, who announced he is requesting the Justice Department to block the legislation. The Post has reached out to the Department of Justice for comment on whether it plans to intervene.
California State Senator Tony Strickland echoed these sentiments, accusing Newsom and Democratic lawmakers of undermining constitutional protections. "It goes against everything we have here in America, but with the vague language, it’s shutting down speech and the freedom of the press," Strickland told The Post. "Every person and every taxpayer, every person should be able to ask questions and hold our government accountable.”
Strickland predicted the law would likely face a legal challenge and be ruled unconstitutional, asserting that it violates the First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and the press. He suggested that his team is exploring potential legal avenues if federal intervention does not occur.
California Republicans have framed the law as an attempt by the state government to increase the difficulty of public scrutiny. GOP Chairwoman Corrine Rankin stated, “Californians should be able to question how public funds are used without facing unnecessary barriers to investigation.” Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton linked the controversy to broader debates about government spending and taxation in California.
Representatives for Governor Newsom and Assemblymember Bonta have refuted the characterization that Assembly Bill 2624 is aimed at Shirley or investigative journalism. A spokesperson for the governor stated, “This law has nothing to do with Nick Shirley. It allows immigration service providers to shield their personal information — such as their home address — to protect themselves from getting doxed and harassed.” The spokesperson also claimed that critics are either fabricating conspiracy theories or misinterpreting the legislation.
William A. Jacobson, founder of the Equal Protection Project and a clinical professor of law at Cornell Law School, suggested the bill is a reaction to revelations of public service fraud. "The videos created in connection with journalistic exposure of the fraud captured the public’s attention and sparked law enforcement action,” Jacobson said. “California wants to shut that down by including immigrant services as a protected class who could not be subject to such journalism. But why? This has been dubbed the ‘Stop Nick Shirley Act,’ but it’s really the Stop Uncovering Fraud Act.” Jacobson also noted that federal funds are often involved in state and local programs, which could draw federal interest in the dispute.
The expanded protections under the legislation are scheduled to take effect on October 1, 2027. The debate and potential legal challenges are expected to continue.
