Gov. Gavin Newsom Signs Obviously Unconstitutional 'Stop Nick Shirley Act' to shield migrant NGOs from cameras

Gov. Gavin Newsom signed California’s controversial “Stop Nick Shirley Act” into law on Saturday, August 22, 2026, expanding privacy protections for immigrant aid workers in a move critics say is designed to intimidate citizen journalists exposing taxpayer fraud.

Assembly Bill 2624, authored by Oakland Democrat Mia Bonta (wife of state Attorney General Rob Bonta), expands California’s Safe at Home program — originally created for domestic-violence victims — to employees and volunteers at nonprofits that provide legal, humanitarian and other services to immigrants. Those who document threats can shield their home addresses from public records starting in October 2027.

The law also makes it illegal to post a covered worker’s personal information or image online with the specific intent to incite violence or put them in reasonable fear for their safety. Violators face civil lawsuits with a minimum $4,000 in damages plus attorney fees, and in some cases criminal penalties including fines and jail time.

Republican lawmakers and free-speech advocates have blasted the measure as a transparent attempt to chill independent investigations. They dubbed it the “Stop Nick Shirley Act” after conservative YouTuber and citizen journalist Nick Shirley, whose viral videos alleged widespread fraud at Somali-run daycares in Minnesota and at hospices and related facilities in California — including office complexes in places like Van Nuys. Shirley’s reporting helped spark federal probes, arrests and license revocations in both states.

Cali Dems pass 'Stop Nick Shirley Act' to shield migrant NGOs from cameras - and it's headed straight to Newsom's desk

“Instead of cracking down on the fraudsters, they’re inventing laws to silence the guy filming them in broad daylight,” critics have charged.

Yet under a close reading of the statute, Shirley’s typical methods do not clearly violate the new law. His videos focus on commercial buildings, empty offices, public sidewalks, business licenses and payment records — not private home addresses. The prohibition requires specific intent to incite imminent violence or create reasonable fear for personal safety, not the public-interest goal of exposing alleged waste of taxpayer money. Only people who have enrolled in the Safe at Home program are protected, and public filming itself remains lawful First Amendment activity.

Supporters, including Bonta, insist the bill only targets genuine doxxing and threats, not legitimate journalism, and that it includes intent requirements plus existing press protections. Newsom signed the party-line measure without comment.

Opponents counter that the broad language around “images” and the threat of costly civil lawsuits will still create a chilling effect, letting favored nonprofits cry harassment and try to shut down cameras even when the legal standard isn’t met. The law takes effect Oct. 1, 2027. California taxpayers and independent journalists will be watching closely to see whether it protects workers — or protects the bureaucracy from scrutiny.