Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
DeMaio urges re-referral of 'Stop Nick Shirley Act,' says bill could curb citizen journalists
Loading...
Summary
Assemblymember DeMaio moved to re-refer AB 26 24 (referred on the floor as the 'Stop Nick Shirley Act') to the Privacy Committee, alleging the bill was misrepresented in committee and that Section '62 1 8.19' could prevent individuals from posting videos online; the motion prompted points of order and a substitute motion that redirected action.
Assemblymember DeMaio moved under Assembly Rule 96 to re-refer AB 26 24 (which he and others referred to on the floor as the "Stop Nick Shirley Act") back to the Privacy Committee, asserting the bill's author "misrepresented the contents of the bill, lied to committee members" and that committee members were denied a chance for proper vetting.
DeMaio argued the bill's plain language — which he cited as "Section 62 1 8.19" — would allow a fraud organization to prohibit a person from posting a video online and to seek injunctive or declaratory relief, potentially exposing "citizen journalists" to costly litigation. He said: "This is an infringement on the First Amendment rights of individuals and journalists to go out and uncover fraud."
During the exchange another member raised a point of order and the majority leader cautioned against calling a member a liar on the floor. The debate was curtailed when the majority leader offered and the Assembly accepted a substitute motion to move to business on the daily file; the substitute was accepted by roll call (Ayes 44, Noes 19), which removed the main motion from immediate consideration.
No final committee re-referral of AB 26 24 was recorded in the transcript after the substitute motion was accepted.
