California's 'Stop Nick Shirley Act' is ineffective performative legislation that won't meaningfully restrict journalism
Source: Chris Bray. "The 'Stop Nick Shirley Act' Is A Pathetic Joke." April 15, 2026. thefederalist.com
The Gist
California passed a bill supposedly targeting conservative journalist Nick Shirley, but it's so poorly written and full of loopholes that it won't actually stop anyone from doing journalism. It's just politicians making noise to look tough without creating any real restrictions.
Conclusion
California's AB 2624 (the 'Stop Nick Shirley Act') is ineffective legislation that will not meaningfully restrict investigative journalism or achieve its intended goals
Premises
- The bill's language contains so many narrow conditions and bureaucratic requirements that it becomes functionally meaningless
- California has a pattern of passing similar bills that either get vetoed or prove unenforceable in practice
- The bill only criminalizes posting personal information with provable intent to cause 'imminent great bodily harm,' which is already illegal
- Previous California attempts to restrict criticism (like school board criticism bills) have failed due to First Amendment concerns or practical unworkability
- The legislation is primarily performative outrage designed to produce headlines rather than create meaningful legal restrictions
Assumptions
- First Amendment protections will continue to limit government restrictions on journalism
- California's legislative pattern of ineffective performative bills will continue
- Courts will continue to protect journalistic activities under existing legal frameworks
- The bill's complex bureaucratic structure makes it practically unenforceable