Critics say AB 2624 could chill investigative reporting, while supporters describe it as a privacy and anti-harassment measure for immigrant service providers.

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — A California Assembly bill is drawing fresh scrutiny after a viral video by independent journalist Nick Shirley alleged widespread fraud in state-funded programs, adding fuel to an already charged debate over transparency, privacy and online speech. FOX 11 Los Angeles reported on March 18 that Shirley had published a 40-minute video alleging more than $170 million in fraud tied to “ghost” daycare and hospice locations in California. The claim that the video later reached 7.7 million views has circulated widely online, but that figure could not be independently verified from the public records reviewed here.

At the center of the dispute is AB 2624, authored by Assemblymember Mia Bonta, a Democrat from Oakland. The bill is titled “Privacy for immigration support services providers” and, according to the official bill text, is aimed at protecting people who provide or assist with immigration-related services and who face threats, harassment or intimidation tied to that work. The measure defines covered facilities broadly enough to include nonprofit offices, legal clinics, law offices, accredited immigration-service sites and some healthcare facilities.

The bill has moved forward in committee, but it has not become law. Official California legislative records show AB 2624 passed the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee on April 7 by an 11-2 vote, then was amended and re-referred to the Assembly Judiciary Committee on April 13.

Online critics have portrayed the bill as a direct attempt to force the removal of investigative videos and punish journalists who refuse. The actual text is narrower and more complex. AB 2624 would allow a covered person, or someone acting on that person’s behalf, to make a written demand that others stop posting that person’s personal information or image online when there is a stated safety concern based on an alleged violation of the bill. If that demand is ignored, the remedy described in that section is a civil action for injunctive or declaratory relief, along with court costs and attorneys’ fees for a successful plaintiff.

The bill also contains criminal penalties, but not for every refusal to take down a video. The official text says fines of up to $10,000 per violation and possible jail time apply where someone posts personal information or images online with the intent that another person imminently use that information to commit a violent crime or threat of violence. The same section provides for higher penalties if bodily injury results.

Another detail complicating the debate is that one subsection does not apply to people or entities defined under Section 1070 of the California Evidence Code, a provision commonly associated with shield-law protections for journalists and certain news organizations. That exception has become part of the argument over whether the bill would meaningfully affect mainstream press outlets, citizen journalists, or both.

Supporters of the bill say it is meant to address doxxing and intimidation. A committee analysis for the April 7 hearing said immigrant-service workers and volunteers have faced “online harassment,” “courthouse targeting,” “vigilante threats,” and “death threats,” and described the bill as part of a broader effort to protect people serving immigrant communities.

Opponents, meanwhile, argue the measure could still be used to suppress public-interest investigations. Republican Assemblymember Carl DeMaio, one of the committee’s “no” votes, has labeled the proposal the “Stop Nick Shirley Act” and said it could be used to pressure watchdogs and citizen journalists who publish footage while investigating fraud allegations. That characterization comes from DeMaio and his office; it does not appear in the bill itself or in official legislative summaries.

The political optics intensified because Mia Bonta’s husband, California Attorney General Rob Bonta, announced on April 9 that state authorities had charged 21 suspects and dismantled a $267 million Medi-Cal hospice fraud scheme in Southern California. His office said the case involved stolen identities, fraudulent enrollments and billing for hospice services that were never actually provided. Rob Bonta’s official biography also identifies Mia Bonta as his spouse.

There is no public evidence in the legislative record reviewed here that AB 2624 was written specifically in response to Shirley’s video or to the hospice fraud crackdown announced by the attorney general. Still, the timing has sharpened a broader political fight: whether California is trying to protect vulnerable service providers from harassment, or whether the state risks creating a tool that could be used against people documenting how taxpayer money is spent.