Edit: seems like the DOJ is claiming that that is not the case. Weird…so this is basically going to boil down to each side arguing their interpretation of a regulation.
Can’t say this doesn’t smell just a little political.
The President of the United States very publicly called for Musk and his companies to be investigated back in November of ‘22. Ironically, this was because of supposed relationships with other countries.
https://www.reuters.com/technology/biden-says-elon-musks-rel...
So he deserves investigation due to foreign business relationships, then gets sued for not hiring (edge-case) foreigners to build state of the art rocket technology. Cue the Curb Your Enthusiasm theme song.
It is possible that the roles identified by the DOJ are not under these restriction.
That said, how is this going to be resolved with the compliance requirements
Seems like it’s going to boil down to “we interpreted the regulation wrong, oopsies”.
I thought gp was alluding to something within the last few days.
Regardless, the ITAR issue is secondary; they hire for roles that do not touch ITAR.
I dunno, if the people they are discriminating against are “US persons” and not “foreign persons” under ITAR, then the whole ITAR argument for discrimination, whether its direct coverage or some kind of indirect risk creating something that Tesla wants to try to argue is a bona fide occupational qualification justifying discrimination, is cut off at the root.
If the refugee has a new citizenship in their host nation, then in what sense are they still a refugee?
A “foreign person” is defined in ITAR (22 CFR Sec. 120.63), by reference to two sections of immigration law in Title 8 of the US Code, as someone who is none of the following: a US citizen, a lawful permanent resident, an asylee or refugee, a person lawfully admitted for permanent residency (I haven’t done the analysis to see if this is distinct from “lawful permanent resident” or if its overlap with different language between the categories referenced from different parts of Title 8 of the US Code), a person lawfully admitted for certain classes of temporary residency.
There is also an active question of if the discrimination is still happening, in which case the governments goal is to prevent compliance only in the job listings.
Legal disputes often center on disputes on the meaning of law (including regulations.)
That's…not weird at all.
> Can’t say this doesn’t smell just a little political.
Yes, government actions often smell just a little “of or relating to government, a government, or the conduct of government”.