Dept Of Justice Investigating SpaceX For Not Hiring Non-US Citizens

[steveleach]

ITAR makes it the law to only hire citizens.

No. ITAR makes it the law to only disclose ITAR-controlled information to "US Persons".

See:
https://exportcompliancesolutions.com/blog/2018/09/20/u-s-persons-include-just-citizens/

US Persons include more than just citizens. In the above example, Clifford Chance US LLP was fined $132,000 and faced other penalties for excluding non-citizens from ITAR-controlled positions.

Companies (including SpaceX) hiring for ITAR-controlled projects advertise the US Person restriction prominently on their job postings.
https://boards.greenhouse.io/spacex/jobs/5058962002?gh_jid=5058962002

ITAR REQUIREMENTS:

To conform to U.S. Government space technology export regulations, including the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) you must be a U.S. citizen, lawful permanent resident of the U.S., protected individual as defined by 8 U.S.C. 1324b(a)(3), or eligible to obtain the required authorizations from the U.S. Department of State. Learn more about the ITAR here.

In this case, the person was denied employment because they weren’t a US person, not just that they weren’t a US citizen. So the original post still works as long as you substitute permanent resident instead of citizen

It looks like there's been a communications breakdown somewhere between the claimant, SpaceX, and the DOJ, because from the article: "[the claimant] is not a U.S. citizen, but according to a document filed by SpaceX in response to the DOJ subpoena he is a 'lawful permanent [U.S.] resident holding dual citizenship from Austria and Canada.' "

However if it's true that the question about legal status was only asked in the initial interview, not in the "technical phone screen", and that only a subset of applicants from the initial interview were contacted for the "technical phone screen" this looks like a difficult case for the claimant to prove.

as it was pointed by SpaceX and is well known to anybody who ever applied to anywhere residence status, citizenship etc. are on the first page of (any) application/CV. SpaceX knew who he was and where he came from before arranging interview.

Are you, as an employer, allowed to do something like: "looks like an ITAR nightmare but we'll interview them anyway because they may be sh*t hot and worth the bother" followed by "hmm, no, just average.... next!"

?

[su27k]

Federal judge rules SpaceX must comply with DOJ subpoena of hiring records

A U.S. judge ruled on Wednesday that Elon Musk’s SpaceX must comply with a Department of Justice subpoena for the company’s hiring records, opening the door to a federal probe into the company.

“Respondent SpaceX is ORDERED to comply in full with the subpoena within 21 days,” U.S. judge Dolly Gee wrote in the order.

Gee’s court reviewed the case over the past two months, following SpaceX’s objection in April to the recommendation by another federal judge that the company should be forced to comply with the subpoena.

[steveleach]

Federal judge rules SpaceX must comply with DOJ subpoena of hiring records

A U.S. judge ruled on Wednesday that Elon Musk’s SpaceX must comply with a Department of Justice subpoena for the company’s hiring records, opening the door to a federal probe into the company.

“Respondent SpaceX is ORDERED to comply in full with the subpoena within 21 days,” U.S. judge Dolly Gee wrote in the order.

Gee’s court reviewed the case over the past two months, following SpaceX’s objection in April to the recommendation by another federal judge that the company should be forced to comply with the subpoena.

Like the other folks here, I'm having trouble identifying where SpaceX is in the wrong here.

If the DOJ has a legitimate need for the information they requested in order to investigate a potential violation of employment law then SpaceX is in the wrong. If there was no legitimate need then they weren't.

The courts will decide which it is, presumably.

Looks like the courts have decided that the DOJ did have a legitimate need for the information they requested.

SpaceX can now freely release all that information about other employees without fear of being found guilty of not sufficiently protecting that personal information.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/cnbcnow/status/1694740003383886081

Justice Dept. sues SpaceX, alleging hiring discrimination against refugees and asylum seekers

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/24/doj-sues-spacex-alleging-hiring-discrimination-against-refugees-and-asylum-seekers.html

[Robotbeat]

Ridiculous. The security requirements of almost any SpaceX position make this super hard for anyone not a US citizen, let alone someone without a well-established permanent residency (green card).

I’m super supportive of refugees and asylum seekers, but the federal government should be looking in the d*mn mirror when it comes to their hyper-paranoid criteria with respect to ITAR/EAR/etc.

[Robotbeat]

SpaceX should counter-sue the US government for making it so dang hard to get permanent residency in the first place.

ITAR/EAR/etc are so ambiguous and the political consequences of screwing it up are so big, that it makes complete sense, and is totally rational and fair, for SpaceX to restrict hiring as they would have to emplacements huge information (and physical) barriers within the company if they were to hire people who didn’t have permanent residency. Including having to have someone chaperone them around different parts of the company.

It’s absolutely rich that the DoJ is basically blaming SpaceX for the ambiguity of export restrictions and other security measures that the federal government imposed.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1694749030843052408

The DOJ lawsuit against SpaceX centers around the hiring under ITAR and EAR regulations.

"Export control laws and regulations do not prohibit or restrict employers from hiring asylees and refugees."

Highlights mine. You can read the full lawsuit here:

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/24/doj-sues-spacex-alleging-hiring-discrimination-against-refugees-and-asylum-seekers.html

[Star One]

Ridiculous. The security requirements of almost any SpaceX position make this super hard for anyone not a US citizen, let alone someone with a well-established permanent residency (green card).

I’m super supportive of refugees and asylum seekers, but the federal government should be looking in the d*mn mirror when it comes to their hyper-paranoid criteria with respect to ITAR/EAR/etc.

Guess you don’t know the rules too well judging by the post under yours. Or did you just assume you were better versed in them than the DOJ.

[whitelancer64]

The company I work for is ITAR compliant, I would have assumed that asylum seekers and refugees would need to have legal residency squared away before they could be hired.

In SpaceX's defense, the consequences of being in violation of ITAR, even unknowingly, are extremely serious. If asylum seekers and refugees can be hired under ITAR, that is something the law should be very, very clear on rather than having companies err on the side of caution.

[Robotbeat]

https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1694749030843052408

The DOJ lawsuit against SpaceX centers around the hiring under ITAR and EAR regulations.

"Export control laws and regulations do not prohibit or restrict employers from hiring asylees and refugees."

Highlights mine. You can read the full lawsuit here:

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/24/doj-sues-spacex-alleging-hiring-discrimination-against-refugees-and-asylum-seekers.html

That’s the claim, but yeah, they pretty much do. You’d literally need to chaperone each non-permanent-resident at all times, restrict any documentation or presentations that have not been through export review, etc. Even janitorial services see printouts, etc.

I work at an aerospace agency, and even our intern presentations all have to go through export review before anyone who isn’t a US permanent resident can see it. Every single one. Every non-permanent-resident visitor needs to have a special badge with bright red lettering on it indicating they need to be chaperoned at all times.

So yeah. Probably this DoJ lawyer doesn’t understand how big of a pain it is.

[StormtrooperJoe]

I have spent my whole professional career so far in the defense/aerospace industry, and my experience so far has been that outside of actual classified information (which only a small number of SpaceX employees should require), what is important is your permanent residency status, not your citizenship. There is some grey area, for example if you a permanent resident of the United States, but work for a foreign entity, then you are considered a foreign agent, but I don't think that should apply in most cases. Given that, I see no reason why SpaceX should be having issues hiring non-citizen permanent residents for most positions.

However I am not a lawyer, my experience with it comes from the many ITAR trainings I have had to take over the years and the practices of the companies I have worked at.

[Robotbeat]

I have spent my whole professional career so far in the defense/aerospace industry, and my experience so far has been that outside of actual classified information (which only a small number of SpaceX employees should require), what is important is your permanent residency status, not your citizenship. There is some grey area, for example if you a permanent resident of the United States, but work for a foreign entity, then you are considered a foreign agent, but I don't think that should apply in most cases. Given that, I see no reason why SpaceX should be having issues hiring non-citizen permanent residents for most positions.

However I am not a lawyer, my experience with it comes from the many ITAR trainings I have had to take over the years and the practices of the companies I have worked at.

The context here is people without permanent residency .

Also, the rules have gotten stricter even in just the last 10 years I’ve been in the industry.

[Robotbeat]

I hate ITAR/EAR and the huge barriers to getting legal permanent residency with a passion. You probably won’t find anyone more passionate about those two things than me. But these failures are the federal government’s fault, not private companies, so when the federal government sues a private company for a problem THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CREATED, it ticks me off.

[wannamoonbase]

I hate ITAR/EAR and the huge barriers to getting legal permanent residency with a passion. You probably won’t find anyone more passionate about those two things than me. But these failures are the federal government’s fault, not private companies, so when the federal government sues a private company for a problem THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CREATED, it ticks me off.

ITAR is a big hurdle but security of missile propulsion is also a big deal.

We live in an age where national security isn't front of mind.  But it always should be.

[envy887]

https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1694749030843052408

The DOJ lawsuit against SpaceX centers around the hiring under ITAR and EAR regulations.

"Export control laws and regulations do not prohibit or restrict employers from hiring asylees and refugees."

Highlights mine. You can read the full lawsuit here:

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/24/doj-sues-spacex-alleging-hiring-discrimination-against-refugees-and-asylum-seekers.html

That’s the claim, but yeah, they pretty much do. You’d literally need to chaperone each non-permanent-resident at all times, restrict any documentation or presentations that have not been through export review, etc. Even janitorial services see printouts, etc.

I work at an aerospace agency, and even our intern presentations all have to go through export review before anyone who isn’t a US permanent resident can see it. Every single one. Every non-permanent-resident visitor needs to have a special badge with bright red lettering on it indicating they need to be chaperoned at all times.

So yeah. Probably this DoJ lawyer doesn’t understand how big of a pain it is.

Asylees and refugees are "protected persons" and can handle ITAR materials in the same way as citizens and LPRs.

But yeah, if you want companies to trust that they won't get in trouble, the law needs to be a lot more explicit about it. This suit is transparently trying to get the courts to fix something that should really be fixed by Congress.

[Robotbeat]

Well, if greater clarity to the situation is brought by this lawsuit, that would be a really good thing.

SpaceX would be able to point to this lawsuit as justification if any future ITAR/EAR snaggles occur.

[Robotbeat]

https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1694749030843052408

The DOJ lawsuit against SpaceX centers around the hiring under ITAR and EAR regulations.

"Export control laws and regulations do not prohibit or restrict employers from hiring asylees and refugees."

Highlights mine. You can read the full lawsuit here:

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/24/doj-sues-spacex-alleging-hiring-discrimination-against-refugees-and-asylum-seekers.html

That’s the claim, but yeah, they pretty much do. You’d literally need to chaperone each non-permanent-resident at all times, restrict any documentation or presentations that have not been through export review, etc. Even janitorial services see printouts, etc.

I work at an aerospace agency, and even our intern presentations all have to go through export review before anyone who isn’t a US permanent resident can see it. Every single one. Every non-permanent-resident visitor needs to have a special badge with bright red lettering on it indicating they need to be chaperoned at all times.

So yeah. Probably this DoJ lawyer doesn’t understand how big of a pain it is.

Asylees and refugees are "protected persons" and can handle ITAR materials in the same way as citizens and LPRs.

But yeah, if you want companies to trust that they won't get in trouble, the law needs to be a lot more explicit about it. This suit is transparently trying to get the courts to fix something that should really be fixed by Congress.

Agreed.

There are multiple definitions of “US Person” in the code and government websites. Some make reference to “protected individuals” and some do not. This Biden era Executive Order, for instance, makes reference to US persons as citizens and permanent residents, but doesn’t mention “protected individuals.”

https://www.whitecase.com/insight-alert/president-biden-orders-establishment-new-program-restrict-us-outbound-investment

(Similar executive orders use similar definitions, including a 2012 EO.)

[meekGee]

Ridiculous. The security requirements of almost any SpaceX position make this super hard for anyone not a US citizen, let alone someone with a well-established permanent residency (green card).

I’m super supportive of refugees and asylum seekers, but the federal government should be looking in the d*mn mirror when it comes to their hyper-paranoid criteria with respect to ITAR/EAR/etc.

Guess you don’t know the rules too well judging by the post under yours. Or did you just assume you were better versed in them than the DOJ.

The rules can be self contradictory or just impractical.

You can hire them, but can't expose them to 90% of your information...  So what exactly are you supposed to do?

[Robotbeat]

Note that JPL’s internships say they require you to be a US citizen or Lawful Permanent Resident (green card holder). NASA’s internship program is stricter, requiring you to be a citizen.

I’d love for the DoJ to sue the federal government so we can figure out what’s real or not.

[ulm_atms]

I'm sorry but there is something stupid about suing one of two DoD fully certified/clearanced launch providers for some of the most sensitive devices made.....because they won't hire non-US citizens.   

I get that they "technically" can, but, as Robotbeat showed, it ain't just SpaceX.  Their entire defense could be, "We are just doing what NASA and everyone else does." and then all evidence submitted is all the job requirements from everyone else showing that.  That would be an interesting argument IMO.