SACRAMENTO, Sept. 5 — Investigative journalist Nick Shirley has filed a federal lawsuit challenging a California law that criminalizes publishing images of or personal information about immigration support services providers, a statute free speech advocates have dubbed the “Stop Nick Shirley Act.” The suit, Shirley v. Bonta, was filed by America First Legal alongside John W. Howard of JW Howard Attorneys.
It targets Assembly Bill 2624, introduced by Assemblymember Mia Bonta on February 20, 2026 — four days after Shirley released a video alleging voter fraud in California on February 16, 2026. The legislation was fast-tracked through the state legislature and signed by Governor Gavin Newsom on August 26, 2026.
The law amends California’s Safe at Home confidentiality program, originally passed in 1998 to shield victims of domestic violence and later expanded to cover abortion providers and individuals using puberty blockers, opposite-sex hormones, and surgeries for gender identity concerns. Bonta has said the measure “adds immigration support services providers to the state’s Safe at Home program, protecting these workers from targeted harassment and doxxing.” Strategically, the timing is the crux of the dispute.
Shirley’s December 2025 investigation, titled “I Investigated Minnesota’s Billion Dollar Fraud Scandal,” focused on the Quality Learing Center [sic] and other daycare centers receiving government funds despite appearing empty. The video has drawn more than 4.2 million YouTube views.
CNN reported that following the investigation, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Bureau of Investigation “ramped up their presence in the state, and federal funding for child care in the entire state was frozen.” Shirley, who maintains nearly two million YouTube subscribers and almost 370 million total video views, points to fraud convictions that followed his reporting and has challenged journalists to visit the daycare centers themselves.
Government officials and legacy media outlets have condemned his journalism and questioned its accuracy, while Shirley insists his work exposed government waste, fraud, and harmful immigration policies. America First Legal President Gene Hamilton questioned why California would impede investigations into illegal immigration and immigrant-related fraud. What this signals is a widening legal collision between state-level privacy protections and independent investigative reporting on immigration enforcement.
The broader stakes now rest with the federal court — whether California can criminalize the publication of such information without running afoul of constitutional protections, and whether Shirley’s case becomes the template for similar challenges elsewhere.
