AB 2624 is one of California’s most controversial privacy bills of 2026. The measure would expand the state’s Safe at Home program to people who work with immigrants, allowing them to keep their home addresses private and sue or seek criminal penalties against people who maliciously post their personal information online. Supporters say the bill is needed because immigration-service workers have faced threats and harassment amid the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown. Opponents argue the bill’s language is broad enough to discourage investigative journalism, undercover videos, and scrutiny of taxpayer-funded nonprofits.
California’s AB 2624 would hide the home addresses of immigration-service workers and punish doxxing aimed at inciting violence. Supporters call it a safety measure; critics say it could chill journalism and watchdog reporting. #StopNickShirleyAct #AB2624 #FreeSpeech #NickShirley pic.twitter.com/bbKLgmB1hP
— Matthew Brady (@mattbrady775) April 15, 2026
- California Assembly Bill 2624, introduced by Assemblymember Mia Bonta in February 2026, would extend California’s Safe at Home address-confidentiality program to immigration support workers, volunteers, and related service providers. The bill was amended April 9, 2026 and remains in committee after being re-referred to the Assembly Judiciary Committee on April 13.
- Eligible participants would include employees, volunteers, and providers at immigration legal clinics, nonprofits, advocacy groups, accredited legal-service sites, health care facilities, and similar organizations serving immigrants.
- The bill would allow these workers to use a substitute mailing address through the Secretary of State, keeping their home address out of most public records and enabling confidential voter registration and mail forwarding.
- AB 2624 would make it illegal to post, distribute, sell, or trade personal information or images of these workers online if done with the intent to incite imminent violence or threaten their safety. “Personal information” includes addresses, photos, license plates, employment history, and similar identifying details.
- Civil penalties would include injunctions, attorney’s fees, and damages up to three times actual losses, with a minimum award of $4,000 in some cases. Criminal violations could be prosecuted as misdemeanors with up to a $10,000 fine and one year in jail, or as felonies with fines up to $50,000 if bodily injury results.
- Supporters argue the bill responds to increasing harassment, threats, doxxing, and intimidation directed at immigration-service workers during 2025. The bill’s findings specifically cite “coordinated campaigns and death threats” tied to the current political climate.
- Critics, including some Republicans and independent journalists, argue the bill could discourage investigative reporting or citizen oversight by creating legal risk for publishing images or identifying details from public places or public records. Supporters counter that the bill only applies when there is intent to threaten or incite violence, and it explicitly exempts traditional journalists protected under California Evidence Code Section 1070.
