admin
Assemblymember Carl DeMaio says he has a plaintiff and a plan: he and a conservative legal coalition are preparing to sue to block California’s newly chaptered bill AB 2624 — the law critics call the “Stop Nick Shirley Act” — after Governor Gavin Newsom signed it. DeMaio told Fox News Digital the measure threatens citizen journalism and that he has been talking with the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office for Civil Rights. If true, this is the opening bell for a big First Amendment fight over who gets to expose government waste and fraud.
What AB 2624 actually does
AB 2624, titled “Privacy for Immigration Support Services Providers,” creates a Safe‑at‑Home style address‑confidentiality program for designated immigration support service providers, employees, and volunteers. The law also adds online posting restrictions and civil and criminal penalties for publishing protected individuals’ personal information or images under certain intent standards. The statute includes a written demand/takedown process, civil damages (including treble damages and a $4,000 minimum per violation), and potential criminal penalties for intentional misconduct. The bill phases in implementation and sets key enforceable provisions to take effect on October 1, 2027, while directing the Secretary of State to begin program steps earlier.
Why critics say this is a First Amendment landmine
Conservative critics call the law a blunt instrument that could chill ordinary reporting and citizen investigations. DeMaio says AB 2624 “basically makes it illegal for a citizen journalist to document fraud of taxpayer money and post that on the internet,” and he’s lining up to test that claim in court. The constitutional battleground will be the statute’s intent standard and the takedown and damages rules. There’s already been at least one pre‑enforcement challenge to the measure and more litigation seems likely once the law is chaptered — which it now is. DeMaio also says DOJ officials are aware of his planned case; the Justice Department has not issued a public confirmation of intervention at this time.
What comes next — a court fight over speech and accountability
Expect rapid movement toward federal court. Pre‑enforcement suits can be filed now to block enforcement, and once enforcement is possible the stakes rise sharply. Defenders of AB 2624 say it targets doxxing and real threats, not journalism, and that the program is voluntary and modeled on long‑standing confidentiality tools. Opponents say the online‑posting causes of action, stiff statutory damages, and criminal penalties create too much risk for reporters and citizen watchdogs who expose corruption. If DeMaio’s legal team files, the complaint will focus on the First Amendment, and judges will have to balance abuse protections against speech rights — not an easy call, but a critical one for public oversight.
Call it what you want — safe addresses or a shield for political allies — but this fight matters to anyone who believes taxpayers and voters deserve to know how public money is spent. If Newsom and lawmakers wanted to protect workers from real threats, they could have done it narrowly. Instead they passed a law that could be read to muzzle the kind of grassroots reporting that uncovered scandals in other states. The courts will soon decide whether AB 2624 protects safety or hands politicians and allied NGOs a legal chokehold on scrutiny. Either way, the outcome will shape who gets to speak truth to power in California for years to come.
