“Stop Nick Shirley” Act Passes & Trump Drops Economic D-Day | 8.25.26

On a recent episode of Morning Wire, Executive Editor John Bickley joined Georgia Howe to break down two major stories: California's controversial "Stop Nick Shirley Act" and President Trump's "Economic D-Day" strategy. The discussion covered the implications of these developments, from journalistic freedom to international trade relations.

The "Stop Nick Shirley Act" in California

California Governor Gavin Newsom recently signed a new law, dubbed the "Stop Nick Shirley Act," which has sparked considerable debate. Howe explained that the law is intended to protect immigration workers from harassment, but critics argue it will shield taxpayer-funded organizations from scrutiny and discourage journalists from investigating fraud. Megan Basham, Daily Wire Culture Reporter, provided further details, stating that the legislation, Assembly Bill 2624, expands California's existing "Safe at Home" address confidentiality program. This program now includes staff affiliated with NGOs, particularly those involved in immigration-related services, such as resettlement and legal aid.

Basham elaborated that supporters of the bill claim these workers face threats and online harassment due to exposure from independent journalists like Nick Shirley. The program allows these organizations and their workers to substitute confidential mailing addresses for their actual addresses in government records. However, critics argue this makes it harder to track who is spending government money and how. The legislation also creates civil liability around publishing certain identifying information, such as images of people or buildings, which can be relevant when documenting publicly funded organizations.

California Assemblyman Carl DeMaio condemned the legislation, describing it as making it a crime for a citizen journalist like Nick Shirley to capture video or photographic evidence of fraud, wasteful spending, and the misuse of taxpayer money. DeMaio also claimed that Democrats cut his microphone during the floor debate on the bill, preventing him from speaking. Howe questioned why Republicans are calling this the "Stop Nick Shirley Act," to which Basham explained that Shirley represents a type of journalism that has become increasingly influential but also threatening to political establishments. Shirley gained national attention by visiting daycares and hospices in California and Minnesota, exposing massive fraud in these programs. For example, one daycare operator, Fahima Mahamoud, pleaded guilty to participating in two different fraud schemes that cost taxpayers over $5 million in federal funds. Another arrest involved a foreign-born hospice owner in California accused of $27 million in Medicaid fraud. Shirley testified about his work in front of the Senate last month, emphasizing that fraud steals from all taxpayers, regardless of political affiliation.

Democrats, however, boycotted Shirley's testimony, deeming the hearing partisan political theater. Newsom and California Democrats insist the law will not impact investigative journalism or silence reporters. Their argument is that simply filming someone, identifying a nonprofit, or reporting suspected fraud in a journalistic context will not automatically violate the statute. California Assemblywoman Mia Bonta, who originally introduced the bill, dismissed concerns about its impact on journalism as "MAGA misinformation." However, Howe pointed out that California Republicans are concerned that the law would allow NGOs to seek attorneys' fees and damages of at least $4,000 against a journalist, which could be enough to "chill" fraud reporting. The legality of the bill, particularly concerning the First Amendment, is expected to face significant legal challenges, potentially reaching the Supreme Court.