Independent journalist Nick Shirley turned the tables on a New York Times reporter who repeatedly pushed the Democrat defense of California's so-called "Stop Nick Shirley Act."

Independent journalist Nick Shirley, the 24-year-old YouTuber whose viral reporting on empty Somali-run "learing centers" in Minnesota and hospice schemes in California helped blow open a national fraud scandal, was interviewed by NYT reporter Laurel Rosenhall outside the State Capitol after a rally against Assembly Bill 2624.

Rosenhall is The Times' Sacramento-based California politics correspondent. She showed up with a notepad. Shirley showed up with a camera, a "Califraudia Republic" hoodie, and a simple question the paper of record could not answer: why is California writing a law that protects the people spending public money instead of the people exposing how that money disappears?

Shirley posted the clip Thursday with a caption that said it all:

"Here is the New York Times realizing they are advocating for a law that would effect journalism and fraud from being exposed."

Rosenhall starts in defense mode. According to her, lawmakers maintain that the bill was already being developed before Shirley traveled to California.

Shirley immediately shot back: "Not true."

"Because I announced on January 31 that I was coming to California," Shirley explained. "I had already filmed the videos. The word had already gotten out that I filmed inside these immigration support service providers, and then they created the bill before I published the video."

Official legislative records show Democrat Assemblywoman Mia Bonta introduced AB 2624 on February 20, approximately three weeks after Shirley says he publicly announced his California investigation. Bonta is married to California Attorney General Rob Bonta.

Rosenhall continued pressing the Democrat talking point, telling Shirley that immigration-service providers claim they had experienced problems "for quite a long time" and were supposedly unaware of his work when they decided the legislation was necessary.

"It's a lie, quite frankly," Shirley responded.

Shirley argued that California already has laws against doxxing and threatening people and warned that AB 2624 creates a special protected class for virtually anyone associated with an immigration-service organization.

"There's no need for this bill," Shirley said. "They're making a protected class by specifically saying immigration support service providers."

The enacted legislation defines "immigration support services" broadly to include legal representation, advocacy, case management, humanitarian relief, referrals, translation, counseling, and healthcare.

Even more troubling, the law's definition of a protected provider includes a person who "provides, assists in providing, or receives" those services.