Close Menu

House Republicans Just Asked Todd Blanche to Crush Newsom’s ‘Stop Nick Shirley’ Law

Updated: GOVERNMENT

Democrats proved again recently they don’t care about taxpayers, they don’t care about honesty, they certainly don’t care about law and order, and they don’t care if you know they don’t care about any of these things in states they control. That’s why California Democrats, with their supermajority and left-wing stooge for a governor, Gavin Newsom, passed a law to stop an independent journalist from exposing the massive Medicaid fraud and abuse in the once-Golden State.

But the insult to taxpayers (state and federal, by the way) could soon be coming to an end. Nine House Republicans, led by California Rep. James Gallagher and including Rep. August Pfluger (who chairs the Republican Study Committee), sent a letter to AG Todd Blanche Thursday asking him to investigate California’s AB 2624 and take legal action to prevent it from taking effect. Their letter is direct: “The important work of uncovering and addressing fraud is just beginning, and yet California Democrats and Governor Newsom are taking brazen and potentially unconstitutional steps to impede it.”

They’re right on both counts. Brazen. Potentially unconstitutional. And timed to protect the exact fraud operations being exposed.

AB 2624 — commonly known as the ‘Stop Nick Shirley Act’ because California’s own Democratic Assembly members referred to Shirley by name when discussing it — shields certain immigration service providers from public scrutiny by restricting the online publication of their personal information or images when officials determine the material was “posted to harass or incite violence.” Under these provisions, journalists and private citizens could face civil lawsuits, minimum $4,000 in damages, and potentially jail time for publishing now-protected information.

The practical effect is straightforward: the immigration advocacy nonprofits that Shirley has been documenting on camera — filming empty daycare facilities collecting massive state reimbursements, knocking on the doors of 126-year-old registered voters, exposing ghost organizations billing California for services never rendered — would gain legal protection from exactly that kind of journalism. The law doesn’t prohibit the fraud. It prohibits uncovering it.

California Democrats insist the law wasn’t designed to suppress fraud allegations or target Shirley specifically. Then why did they name it after him? Why did Assemblywoman Mia Bonta — wife of California AG Rob Bonta, who is himself under federal scrutiny — sponsor it? Why did it move through the legislature in two weeks with no public comment period?

Shirley held a rally at the California State Capitol Wednesday protesting the bill, drawing hundreds of supporters. He says he’s willing to “test” the new law — to continue filming and publishing exactly what he’s been filming and publishing, and let California’s Democratic government try to prosecute him for it.

That’s the right instinct. The First Amendment exists precisely for this situation — a state government attempting to criminalize the documentation of its own corruption. The ACLU has historically defended exactly these press freedom cases, though their willingness to apply their stated principles consistently when the journalist being targeted is exposing Democratic Party-aligned fraud organizations remains to be seen.

What Todd Blanche does with the letter matters enormously. The DOJ has been filing suits against state laws that obstruct federal priorities across immigration, election integrity, and law enforcement cooperation. A state law that criminalizes investigative journalism into federally-funded fraud operations falls squarely within that pattern.

Gavin Newsom signed the Stop Nick Shirley Act. Nick Shirley is still filming. Nine House Republicans just asked the Attorney General of the United States to take it down. Good. Do it.