Remember the DOJ's bizarre suite alleging the company engaged in employment discrimination against non-US citizens.
https://nypost.com/2023/09/20/biden-doj-targeting-of-elon-mu...
Hilarious considering how much tax revenue the US Government has.
So, here's Musk, proposing that they government do even more - hire more people. There are three options: Find something else to cut, raise more revenue, or run a larger deficit. Musk's lack of taxes is directly relevant.
Not sure why you think it is unfair for the US government to be enforcing the law. Especially when these are people who are in the US legally and are more than likely on a pathway to US citizenship.
Would anyone here seriously want a situation where tech companies would only hire US citizens and not those on relevant work visas ? This would decimate the whole industry.
[1] https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-space...
Does Northrop Grumman hire refugees and asylees? Does Lockheed Martin?
And not all jobs at those companies require clearance, far from it actually.
Clearance requires US citizenship.
> And not all jobs at those companies require clearance, far from it actually.
This is the more important point.
"...if a non-U.S. citizen requires access to U.S. classified information and meets the requirements of the 32 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 117.10(k), a Limited Access Authorization (LAA) no higher than the Secret level may be issued."
https://www.dcsa.mil/Industrial-Security/International-Progr...
I mean, I originally thought about lengthening my answer to point out that there are limited ways to allow people of extraordinary necessity to work on classified projects, but I figured it wasn't necessary.
How do you think information is shared amongst NATO? Do they get American citizenship for a day?
Not every Clearance do not require US citizenship.
For NATO, you carry in security clearance from a member nation.
ITAR restricted roles are restricted to "US persons". SpaceX confused that terminology with "US citizens", but "US persons" is a broader term than "US citizens".
And I can assure you, outside the US, even Chinese nationals can have access to ITAR equipment and data. I am no US person neither, and I had in the past. As does every single user of US military gear in nations the US exports to...
Edit: That approach could get you sued for discrimination so.
That being said, ITAR is not a job classification, ITAR covers the move of anything defense or dual use related (data, information, hardware...) outside the US with some weird things about nationalities of people handling those things. It has nothing to do with classified or secret information, that is something different in addition to ITAR.
The thing that puzzles me about roles like janitors: ITAR is "need to know, right to know", meaning if you don't have both, you don't need access to ITAR protected data. And since the normal janitor, or payroll admin, has neither nobody bothers those roles with ITAR normally...
...
(3)“Protected individual” defined As used in paragraph (1), the term “protected individual” means an individual who— (A)is a citizen or national of the United States, or (B)is an alien who is lawfully admitted for permanent residence, is granted the status of an alien lawfully admitted for temporary residence under section 1160(a) or 1255a(a)(1) of this title, is admitted as a refugee under section 1157 of this title, or is granted asylum under section 1158 of this title;
...
b) US government issues security clearances not SpaceX so it is their call whether a candidate is suitable or not. And given that they are filing a lawsuit we can assume this is not an issue.
c) The issues raised by the DOJ do not relate specifically to security clearances.
SpaceX employees are very well compensated.
> working directly on Falcon rockets for that matter, since they aren’t exactly secret or weaponized
There is a long list of adversaries trying to develop technologies that approach SpaceX's. (Every missile program, for starters.)
SpaceX has nothing to do with giving clearances. They just check if they are active (they can pay the government to investigate if someone should be given one)
And many workers will not require security clearance.
"Moreover, asylees’ and refugees’ permission to live and work in the United States does not expire, and they stand on equal footing with U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents under export control laws"
None of this is free.
Edit: Thinking of it, getting ITAR stuff to people and places ourside the US is the point of ITAR.
The DOJ alleges that they excluded asylees and refugees in their job postings. But this doesn't exclude asylees or refugees. It says applicants have to be citizens, permanent resident, or protected individuals as defined in the law: > 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.
The referenced law is the one referenced by the DOJ that includes asylees and refugees.
This job posting that is for top-secret cleared individuals has the same language: https://web.archive.org/web/20190513175514/https://boards.gr...
If not then maybe they really do need money for more competent staff.
The FAA?
The media had a field day with the pad damage. But there were chunks of concrete lofted for miles from the launch site. Nobody is targeting Musk from the FAA.
This wasn't bizarre and was appropriate. The company updated their recruitment policies to comply.
There's nothing bizarre about the DOJ prosecuting someone who has no filter and constantly brags about his disdain for the law. In fact, it makes you quite an obvious target for prosecutors. See also: Trump, Donald J.
However, if you read (or listen in my case) to his recently released biography (it presents both his flaws and greatness), you will see plenty of examples of intentionally flouting regulations. This is due to a combination of ignorance/impulsiveness (e.g. the $420/share fiasco), a maniacal sense of urgency, reality distortion (e.g. Full self driving that is not full self driving), and product perfectionism (e.g not including a safety warning on the back of the passenger side mirror because he didn't like how it looked). It's also ingrained in his way of working to question all requirements until it is proved that they are needed- this would also predispose one towards flouting regulation until enforcement.
All of these traits have helped to make him highly successful, but they all come bundled with a dark side that makes for an inevitable clash with regulators.
This never happened.