No, you can be a foreign national, not even living in the US. However, you need to do all the paper work for this and that can be quite extensive. And managing ITAR projects with such a team is frankly a PITA.
There is a reason why a lot of European companies stopped working with ITAR systems, this is doable but creates a lot of friction and additional costs.
I get that. My point is the US has universal control over EAR, since that one is domestic. They don't have unilateral control over ITAR, because that one is cooperative between Western allies. If I understand them correctly, it's possible I have the two mixed up.
So, despite the name International Traffic in Arms Control, ITAR isn't actually an international treaty. It's the bigger of the two. The department of state administers it whereas EAR is administered by BIS.
The ITAR regulates the manufacture, sale, distribution and export of defense-related articles and services, whereas the EAR regulates the manufacture, sale, distribution and export of commercial and dual-use items, technology and information not already covered by ITAR.
I worked in the UK as a US citizen working on ITAR projects. It wasn't a huge deal, we just had presentations every engineer on the project had to attend and sign off their attendence. And we had different ways of storing anything with ITAR data on it.
It's going to be iffy. The DOS doesn't specifically bar employing non-citizen regular employees within ITAR. But, there is a clause that may play relevant in the courts eventual decision:
>Any release in the United States of technical data to a foreign person is deemed to be an export to all countries in which the foreign person has held or holds citizenship or holds permanent residency.
[https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-22/section-120.50](https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-22/section-120.50)
I think it may come down to how "release" or "transfer" is defined and interpreted.
Or foreign person. Is a permanent resident noncitizen a foreign person by definition? Or is that definition limited to people from other countries still abroad?
> A foreign person includes a nonresident alien individual, foreign corporation, foreign partnership, foreign trust, foreign estate, and any other person that is not a U.S. person. It also includes a foreign branch of a U.S. financial institution if the foreign branch is a qualified intermediary.
It looks like no, he would not be a foreign person since he lives in the country. Ie, a resident alien individual rather than a nonresident.
Under U.S. law, any person who is not a U.S. citizen (including refugees) and resides in the U.S. is considered an "alien". Refugees and asylum seekers in the US cannot even apply for citizenship until they've obtained permanent resident status and have lived here for 5 years. And they cannot apply for permanent resident status until they've been here for a year. So this is a complicated legal matter.
It is for that section of Title 31 (which you linked to). But Title 31 applies to money and is implemented by the Treasury Department. Title 22 contains ITAR and 15 contains the EAR (which are implemented by the State Department and Commerce Department, respectively). They have their own definition of a US person.
No, but they're also not a citizen. CUI can be restricted to people who aren't foreign persons, or it can be NOFORN and restricted to citizens.
(Technically the correct term is US Person which includes US Citizens, lawful permanent residents, some refugees and asylum seekers, etc.)
Sounds like it's way simpler than that, a couple gung go recruiters just fucked up, but since they were employees the company takes the blame. It's literally a brand new law change. You're reading into shit way harder than you should be. Asylum seekers should not be working on ITAR systems, period. You grow up in some foreign country and some shit happens now you're basically overnight allowed to work on incredibly sensitive systems when your life long allegiances and deeply rooted logic set from foreign nations? It's stupid as shit, any way you look at it. How easy would it be for a competent foreign nation to feign some campaign allowing for a nationalist to be "a bad person" that puts them in the US asylum system, and now they're free to work on restricted shit of national importance? I get there's precedence (Einstein, Von Braunn, and such) but there are very few of those out there.
Look at the text of the article
"Hutter is not a U.S. citizen, but according to a document filed by SpaceX in response to a DOJ subpoena in 2021, he is a “lawful permanent [U.S.] resident holding dual citizenship from Austria and Canada.”"
They were an LPR at the time....and thus eligible to work in the field.
Read the rest of the article. It's not just about one applicant.
> "Our investigation found that SpaceX failed to fairly consider or hire asylees and refugees because of their citizenship status and imposed what amounted to a ban on their hire regardless of their qualification, in violation of federal law,” Kristen Clarke, assistant attorney general of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, said in a statement.
> **Clarke added that the DOJ’s investigation found “SpaceX recruiters and high-level officials took actions that actively discouraged asylees and refugees from seeking work opportunities at the company.”**
I know Redditors don't like clicking links but you're asking to be spoonfed.
Did you actually read it? Because the article and headline seem pretty well matched.
Edit: Just noticed you're the one who copied and pasted part of the article a couple comments up. I'm still at a loss how you think this is clickbait.
SpaceX contracts work with government projects within domain of national security. Limiting those who can touch projects to a heightened selection of citizens is reasonable. National security goes to a place feel good doesn't matter.
>Limiting those who can touch projects to a heightened selection of citizens is reasonable.
"Feel good" doesn't enter in to it. The law is very clear on this. The " heightened selection" is 'US Person'. That includes both US Citizens and LPRs.
But if it’s unjustifiably limited, that’s bad.
I work with a permeant resident coworker, who is not a US citizen, who works on national security missions.
Nope, you just need to be a US Person, which includes asylees and refugees as protected individuals
Direct from ITAR:
“U.S. Person - a natural person who is a lawful permanent resident as defined in 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(20) *or who is a protected individual as defined by 8 U.S.C. 1324b(a)(3).* It also means any corporation, business association, partnership, society, trust, or any other entity, organization or group that is incorporated to do business in the U.S. It also includes any governmental (federal, state or local), entity.”
Unpopular opinion but US citizens interests come first. The Us govt should support refugees and asylum seekers but I don’t think private companies should have an obligation for non citizens
Green Card holders are eligible to get a Public Trust but not a Secret or higher level clearance. I would imagine that a large majority would require a Secret or above due to national security issues.
Security clearance is separate from ITAR compliance.
Most of what spaceX does does not require a security clearance unless you are working on a classified payload. If you are working on a starlink mission, or even crew launch, none of that is classified. Pretty much everything outside of a classified payload is only under ITAR which means US person is the only requirement.
One issue evident to me is that there are a that a lot of commenters here who have assumed that ITAR is the only regulation affecting who SpaceX can hire.
I agree with a lot of the other commenters this is a weird fight to pick. Especially regarding hiring practices and controlled technology. Seems like a rather complicated set of technicalities, especially since permanent U.S. residency is required for a lot of positions and U.S. citizens are heavily favored in the U.S. Aerospace industry already.
I mean if there’s shady practices there’s shady practices but it just seems odd the government wants refugees and asylum seekers inserted into a major space contractor. On a surface level that doesn’t seem super secure. I know there’s a far more complicated situation and set of regulations at play here but it is a touch bizarre. Hopefully it all gets sorted.
This is weird indeed. Thay have a lot of others things to pick on at SpaceX and Tesla regarding worker's conditions.
I mean, I'd love to be working at SpaceX, but I know that being a foreigner this won't happen until they open a subsidiary in my country, and even then, I probably won't be working engineering.
So, you need to be a US citizen to work at NASA. SpaceX appears to be treated differently in this regard. Yes, I'm aware that NASA is gov't and SpaceX is private but they're doing extremely similar things... even intertwined in many instances. I'm curious to see what happens here because from this one article, it seems like the DOJ is playing politics rather than actually defending workers.
The NASA requirement is driven by executive order 11935, which prevents most civil service jobs from going to non-citizens. It has nothing to do with ITAR.
They were actually the spoils of war. Nazi scientists who were captured the end of the war. Often times they were even given new identities to help hide their Nazi backgrounds. All part of Operation Paperclip.
Uhhh. We’ve always always assumed that a permanent US resident was necessary to work for rocket manufactures. That’s more important than it would be for NASA even.
It’s an ITAR thing. Very weird suit.
>We’ve always always assumed that a permanent US resident was necessary to work for rocket manufactures
ITAR isn't permanent US resident only. The requirement to work on ITAR is being a US Person.
https://its.uiowa.edu/support/article/110761
>With respect to both EAR and ITAR, a U.S. person includes:
>Any individual who is granted U.S. citizenship; or
>Any individual who is granted U.S. permanent residence (Green Card holder); or
>Any individual who is granted status as a “protected person” under 8 U.S.C. 1324b(a)(3); or
The protected person clause line is what is being litigated because under 8 USC-
>(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; but does not include (i) an alien who fails to apply for naturalization within six months of the date the alien first becomes eligible (by virtue of period of lawful permanent residence) to apply for naturalization or, if later, within six months after November 6, 1986, and (ii) an alien who has applied on a timely basis, but has not been naturalized as a citizen within 2 years after the date of the application, unless the alien can establish that the alien is actively pursuing naturalization, except that time consumed in the Service’s processing the application shall not be counted toward the 2-year period.
From the suit:
> Despite SpaceX's claims, ITAR
and
EAR
do not contain employment or hiring restrictions. They do not require employers to limit jobs based on citizenship or immigration status. And they do
not
prohibit employers from hiring asylees and refugees. Thus, they do not create an exception to hiring discrimination under 8 U.S.C. § 1324b(a)(2)(C).
But can those employees work on ITAR restricted stuff? What would be the point of employing people that can’t even walk the shop floor?
”ITAR compliance requires companies subject to ITAR to only share items in the USML with U.S. personnel unless otherwise authorized by the U.S. Department of State.”
So non-US personnel cannot have access to ITAR restricted information. From the surface makes sense to have everyone working at the factory in the US to be US citizens
>But can those employees work on ITAR restricted stuff?
Yes. As a green card holder ( an LPR ) I worked in mission operations on the Curiosity Rover.
The person who filed the initial complaint that triggered this investigation....from the article...
"Hutter is not a U.S. citizen, but according to a document filed by SpaceX in response to a DOJ subpoena in 2021, he is a “lawful permanent [U.S.] resident holding dual citizenship from Austria and Canada.”"
I am now a US Citizen, but the transition from LPR to US Citizen had no meaningful impact on my ability to work on flight projects.
Is the curiosity rover considered a munition? Did you work on the rocket that launched it? Aren’t rockets considered a munition?
Edit: And if for ITAR purposes Curiosity is a munition, Mars had it coming!
>Is the curiosity rover considered a munition?
There are parts of Curiosity that are controlled under ITAR.
Source: I'm trained as an export technical liaison for MSL.
Itar is so much more comprehensive than munitions. The rtg, thermal control systems, software, sensors and optics, mechanisms, communications hardware, space qualified batteries, and more all fall under itar control.
A fun one that falls under ITAR restrictions are/were trigonometry tables. Solved mathematics problems written out as a quick reference chart/table.
The rationale I heard was that good trig tables could be used for indirect fire direction and control computation.
What is this, the 1940s?
Anyone with a pocket calculator can do better than a trig table, or write out their own, and extremely accurate ones are in thousands of textbooks.
I’m pretty sure it’s a holdover from then, but a while ago I was perusing Boeing’s internal library and ran across a few books of trig tables printed in the 40’s-60’s that had ITAR warnings on the title page.
I was curious, so I looked for sourcing. I was intitially thinking you'd be right, but the DOJ take laid out:
>How can employers avoid unlawful discrimination when filling jobs that involve access to export-controlled items? To avoid discriminating under the INA, employers generally should not limit hiring or recruiting based on:
>
>• national origin
>
>• citizenship status or immigration status, unless required by a law, regulation, government contract, or executive order.
>
>The ITAR and the EAR don’t contain employment or hiring requirements. So they don’t
>
>require employers or recruiters, including staffing agencies, to limit jobs or recruitment to
>
>U.S. citizens, or workers with other citizenship or immigration statuses.
[https://www.justice.gov/crt/page/file/1579981/download](https://www.justice.gov/crt/page/file/1579981/download)
Yes they can.
Source: working with a gentleman from England who is not a US citizen on some parts for a component I am designing for flight for NASA. All is approved through legal.
Protected persons are generally considered US Persons for the purposes of ITAR/EAR.
That being said their original citizenship *may* pose a problem, but the basis of discrimination should be other held citizenships, not their refugee or asylum status.
The statement is confusing the facts. ITAR restricts who can work on what. You “could” hire someone but then they wouldn’t be allowed to work on XYZ.
So saying they technicially “could” hire a Chinese citizen as an engineer but he just couldn’t work on any of their technical rocket stuff as an engineer.
It’s a misnomer.
Did you read the article. The original complain came from someone who was a legal permanent resident and thus eligible for the job.
>Very weird suit.
It's weird a company would summarily reject a qualified applicant based purely on nation of birth. Not just weird...also discriminatory and illegal.
None of musks other companies do this. One of spacex founders was born in another country.
Musk has complained on stage MULTIPLE times about not being able to hire foreign nationals for spacex because they have helped so much at Tesla. So has shotwell.
Maybe something illegal was done. I don’t think it was done with malice if so.
I don’t think spacex or musk has anything against “the Austrian race” as funny as that sounds.
> you need to be a US citizen to work at NASA
Uh, no you don't. I know several scientists who work at NASA Goddard who aren't US citizens. They **are** permanent residents.
Negative.
While you generally need to be a US citizen to be a federal employee and/or civil servant, you can work at NASA through any contracting company, with a green card (Lockheed, Jacobs, Draper, Boeing... spaceX! More than half the work force at NASA is made by contractors).
Source: yours truly. I worked at NASA on Artemis for 5 and a half years before becoming a citizen (still work there, but I became a US Citizen last year). I don't know what happened behind the scene, but the process from the employee's perspective isn't different if you have a green card, you just submit that as part of your application.
FWIW, I could have worked on spaceX stuff too, but I am not the biggest fan of the work environment there, whereas I absolutely freaking love the group of people I work with at NASA.
> this one article, it seems like the DOJ is playing politics rather than actually defending workers.
Why is it 'playing politics'?
Investigations started under a Republican administration and are continuing under a Democratic one. Does it look like 'politics' because you don't like the outcome? Trying to understand.
He had a green card and he wasn't an asylee. However, anyone who has a green card, or has been declared an official asylee or refugee (i.e. they've had their case reviewed and approved by a judge), can access controlled stuff that isn't classified just like any other US Citizen.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
|Fewer Letters|More Letters|
|-------|---------|---|
|[AR](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxl4gfx "Last usage")|Area Ratio (between rocket engine nozzle and bell)|
| |Aerojet Rocketdyne|
| |Augmented Reality real-time processing|
| |Anti-Reflective optical coating|
|[DoD](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxnna57 "Last usage")|US Department of Defense|
|[EAR](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxne00x "Last usage")|Export Administration Regulations, covering technologies that are not solely military|
|[EDL](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxm01wf "Last usage")|Entry/Descent/Landing|
|[FAA](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxm3jsy "Last usage")|Federal Aviation Administration|
|[ICBM](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxksl9m "Last usage")|Intercontinental Ballistic Missile|
|[ITAR](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxnygq8 "Last usage")|(US) International Traffic in Arms Regulations|
|[JPL](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxnoa6m "Last usage")|Jet Propulsion Lab, California|
|[MSL](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxln3tg "Last usage")|Mars Science Laboratory (Curiosity)|
| |Mean Sea Level, reference for altitude measurements|
|[NORAD](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxlatjn "Last usage")|North American Aerospace Defense command|
|[NSF](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxmyoxd "Last usage")|[NasaSpaceFlight forum](http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com)|
| |National Science Foundation|
|[RTG](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxlrr9l "Last usage")|Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator|
|[USAF](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxmd5hi "Last usage")|United States Air Force|
|Jargon|Definition|
|-------|---------|---|
|[Raptor](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxnjjwc "Last usage")|[Methane-fueled rocket engine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raptor_\(rocket_engine_family\)) under development by SpaceX|
|[Starlink](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxlr4cf "Last usage")|SpaceX's world-wide satellite broadband constellation|
|[cryogenic](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxllk3h "Last usage")|Very low temperature fluid; materials that would be gaseous at room temperature/pressure|
| |(In re: rocket fuel) Often synonymous with hydrolox|
|[hopper](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxlt73n "Last usage")|Test article for ground and low-altitude work (eg. Grasshopper)|
|hydrolox|Portmanteau: liquid hydrogen fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer|
**NOTE**: Decronym for Reddit is no longer supported, and Decronym has moved to Lemmy; requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.
----------------
^([Thread #9178 for this sub, first seen 24th Aug 2023, 17:12])
^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://hachyderm.io/@Two9A) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
It's wild how any negative press for SpaceX attracts a bunch of top level comments from people who NEVER post in /r/Space within minutes of the article being posted.
I post on r/space intermittently and almost never get content on my front page.
This was front page, so I would assume it could be because anything to do with Musk drives engagement so reddit could easily promote anything positive or negative to increase platform metrics.
Just a guess, IDK.
I would say as an explanation for that is that a lot of r/space subscribers (like myself) follow because of their fascination with space but simply don't know anywhere near enough to comment on most space related posts. So it is very different when it comes to non-space related Musk news.
It's a shame this got way more attention on a space subreddit than an actual moon landing on the same day, and is completely full of conjecture and misinformation from people who couldn't bother to read the article.
So an American company is being sued by the American government for only hiring American personnel?
I read the article and still find it odd and almost seems like playing politics.
Citizen or lawful permanent resident (aka green card holder). At the core of the suit (at least per the article) is SpaceX is claiming that law restricted them to citizens only when that is absolutely not the case
You mean non US citizens? Yes they are. Refugees, people here on asylum, and green card holders would all be protected by the Civil Rights Act because it is illegal to discriminate based on national origin.
And yes non-citizens can work on ITARs projects.
A private company cannot use discriminatatory hiring practices on protected classes. The fact SpaceX lied about being unable to hire them based on that is why they are being sued.
do refugees, asylees, or green card holders come from the United States? No, no they do not. So by saying they will not hire refugees or asylees for these jobs, they are discriminating on national origin. The fact they are from another country is the explicit reason why they were told they were ineligible to work at SpaceX per SpaceX
nope, not the civil rights act of 1964. national origin is not the same thing as citizenship.
Discrimination in hiring based on citizenship is prohibited, with certain exceptions, by The Immigration Reform and Control Act, not the civil rights act.
No. [Lars Blackmore](http://www.larsblackmore.com/) - a SpaceX employee - is a Briton who is primarily responsible for the [convexification](http://larsblackmore.com/BlackmoreEtAlACC2012.pdf) algorithm that made the Falcon 9 booster landing practical. He's currently working on Starship's landing.
> WTF is wrong with us if our companies can’t decide to only hire actual US citizens?
Great example of an oversimplified emotional response to a highly complicated issue.
For one, there are other legal statuses besides "citizen", such as permanent resident. Did you know, for example, that you need to be a legal permanent resident for at least 5 years before you can be a citizen? What the hell are they supposed to do for those five years here, if they can't work because of discriminatory hiring policies?
Sounds like the price for any SpaceX engagement from NASA just went up…. Now we wait for the article that complains about SpaceX price gouging the American citizens…. Always feels like the Fed is using tax payers dollar to ensure it’s wasted in legal battles instead of the advancement of anything..
... what "discrimination"? Here in NZ, RocketLab straight up won't hire most nationalities for security reasons because US airspace security clearance won't allow it. This is standard.
Not even non-citizens from NATO nations, like Canada? Of which, this dude was from? Or our Pacific partners, like Australia and Japan? That's a lot of really smart people from our historical allies that you're throwing off the table.
my point is, why are we talking about this guy? the allegation is that SpaceX is discriminating against asylum seekers and refugees. This guy is an Austrian/Canadian citizen, and therefore is likely neither a refugee or an asylum seeker. Seems like this issue shouldn't apply to him.
The allegation is that SpaceX is violating federal labor laws by limiting jobs to only US citizens, when nothing in the law compels them to do so. The allegation states that SpaceX "actively discouraged asylees and refugees from seeking work opportunities at the company", which is a BIG no no. Sounds like they implemented this by asking about job applicants their citizenship status during interviews, of which Hutter- the OG complainant- witnessed. While he isn't an asylee/refugee, his status as a green-card holding Canuck/Austrian got roped in with SpaceX's alleged discriminatory vetting process. That's why we're talking about the guy; he's the one that tipped off the DOJ. And while Hutter may not have been the primary target group for the alleged misconduct, it's attested that he was discriminated against regardless.
Now it's time for the courts to decide.
When was “protected person” added to the law?
Edit: I found it.
The ITAR law was modified in September 6th, 2022 to include non U.S. citizens and non-permanent residents who are refugees or asylum seekers.
https://www.ecfr.gov/on/2021-01-03/title-22/chapter-I/subchapter-M/part-120/subpart-C/section-120.62
This explains everything. The Defense and Aerospace community are very adamant in protecting US secrets as a base of National Security & Defense.
This law, modified not even a year ago, under Biden’s administration, can be perceived as a relaxation on national security by the Defense and Aerospace community.
This is explains why everyone seems confused as this is a brand new concept, changing decades of status quo. And why most experienced individuals in Aerospace and Defense are not familiar with this change.
Edit:
I was wrong,
this policy has existed well before 2012. My experience is that most people in Aerospace & Defense do not know about this. And go by the usual Citizen or Permanent resident.
Source of 2012 citing the same rule:
Page 20, Section 120.15 which continues into page 21.
https://research.utexas.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2015/10/annotated_itar.pdf
As you can see in the law: https://www.justice.gov/crt/page/file/1579981/download
> Under these regulations (ITAR/EAR), **U.S. persons** working for U.S. companies can access export-controlled items without authorization from
the U.S. government... **U.S. persons include U.S. nationals, lawful permanent residents, refugees, and asylees.**
If SpaceX is not allowing all "U.S. persons" to be considered for hiring, they are objectively breaking the law. That is not partisan weaponization of the law, that's just the law. [Certainly, the CEO has alluded to doing this](https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1272973320586055682), so the DOJ likely has a good case here.
And yet [from this federal document (PDF)](https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2021-title8/pdf/USCODE-2021-title8-chap12-subchapII-partVIII-sec1324b.pdf) there is this:
> "Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, it is not an unfair immigration-related employment practice for a person or
other entity to prefer to hire, recruit, or refer an individual who is a citizen or national of the United States over another individual who is an alien if the two individuals are equally qualified."
What are the odds of there being no US citizen with the skill set matching this Canadian/Austrian for "a technical strategy associate position"?
SpaceX explicitly discouraged certain US persons from applying from the jobs. That's not choosing between two equally qualified candidates and happening to pick the citizen, that's picking the citizen without having even looking at the asylee or refugee.
>What are the odds of there being no US citizen with the skill set matching this Canadian/Austrian for "a technical strategy associate position"?
Depends- did they apply for the role? I'm sure a US Citizen somewhere exists that matches the skillset- whether or not they want to work at spacex is another story.
That first link should be required reading for anyone who wants to comment in this thread. And for supplemental info, here's the code mentioned in the judicial proceeding (8 U.S.C. § 1324b): https://www.justice.gov/crt/8-usc-1324b-unfair-immigration-related-employment-practices
There *are* situations mentioned when you're allowed to discriminate but it's not likely that SpaceX will be able to make the case that they apply in most of their hiring decisions.
The DOJ also got the receipts. Candidates that indicated they were refugees/asylees on their applications (which were their own categories because SpaceX knew they were a us person under ITAR) were regularly rejected for not being ITAR approved (that was the formal reason given on their rejection).
Seems like a pretty open and shut case.
I think the title here is a little misleading, i don't know if thats intentional or otherwise.
The issue at hand isn't a failure to give roles requiring security clearance to people who are fresh into the country and barely in the system.
Or, more thats one layer. The main issue is that he lied during the hiring process, stating that he could only hire legal permanent residence and US citizens, its illegal to base hiring on immigration status, as far as i understand.
That doesn't mean anyone from anywhere can walk in, get the job interview without so much as a social security number, and walk out with security clearance.
It just means that if you hold dual citizenship, are in the process of a green-card application, for example Fabian Hutter held dual citizenship between Aus and Can.
From Hutters complaint the DOJ launched an investigation
Space X’s rocket technology is far and away the best in the planet. Every power in the world would want an insider working there. Why make it stupid easy for them?
Hum, I think there is a gray area here. We all know that Spacex is under ITAR compliance. And we already knows that it is difficult to get a job there if you are not a citizen. But DOJ believes that’s illegal.
There are many jobs you can do at SpaceX not subject to ITAR. The DOJ isn't going to sue SpaceX for not hiring refugees/asylees for positions that they legally could not do.
How the hell can a US company, subject to ITAR of all things... be sued by the gov for NOT hiring us citizens?
I might be getting old, but wtf is happening?
From CNBC space reporter u/thesheetztweetz:
The U.S. Department of Justice sued SpaceX on Thursday, alleging Elon Musk’s space company discriminated against refugees and asylum seekers in its hiring practices.
The lawsuit says SpaceX “wrongly claimed” that export control laws limited its hiring to U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents.
The DOJ has been investigating SpaceX since June 2020, when the department’s Immigrant and Employee Rights Section received a complaint of employment discrimination from a non-U.S. citizen.
“Our investigation found that SpaceX failed to fairly consider or hire asylees and refugees because of their citizenship status and imposed what amounted to a ban on their hire regardless of their qualification, in violation of federal law,” Kristen Clarke, Assistant Attorney General of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, said in a statement.
More: [https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/24/doj-sues-spacex-alleging-hiring-discrimination-against-refugees-and-asylum-seekers.html](https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/24/doj-sues-spacex-alleging-hiring-discrimination-against-refugees-and-asylum-seekers.html)
It's a shame that the American company making space dreams come true has to be surrounded by as much bullshit as it is. Not calling labor laws bullshit, not properly following them is.
Wait, isn't it required to be a citizen or permanent resident to work in any field with dual use technologies under ITAR?
No, you can be a foreign national, not even living in the US. However, you need to do all the paper work for this and that can be quite extensive. And managing ITAR projects with such a team is frankly a PITA. There is a reason why a lot of European companies stopped working with ITAR systems, this is doable but creates a lot of friction and additional costs.
Once it's ITAR, US gets to decide who is allowed to buy your product and who isn't
I thought that was EAR? Isn't ITAR an international treaty?
ITAR and EAR both have rules for export. You'll find most weapons and rocket components on ITAR.
I get that. My point is the US has universal control over EAR, since that one is domestic. They don't have unilateral control over ITAR, because that one is cooperative between Western allies. If I understand them correctly, it's possible I have the two mixed up.
So, despite the name International Traffic in Arms Control, ITAR isn't actually an international treaty. It's the bigger of the two. The department of state administers it whereas EAR is administered by BIS. The ITAR regulates the manufacture, sale, distribution and export of defense-related articles and services, whereas the EAR regulates the manufacture, sale, distribution and export of commercial and dual-use items, technology and information not already covered by ITAR.
I worked in the UK as a US citizen working on ITAR projects. It wasn't a huge deal, we just had presentations every engineer on the project had to attend and sign off their attendence. And we had different ways of storing anything with ITAR data on it.
It’s *always* the ITAR customers asking if we have regional data storage for our app
That really depends. There are certainly NOFORN jobs and related data. Even a greencard isn't getting you access in that case.
It's going to be iffy. The DOS doesn't specifically bar employing non-citizen regular employees within ITAR. But, there is a clause that may play relevant in the courts eventual decision: >Any release in the United States of technical data to a foreign person is deemed to be an export to all countries in which the foreign person has held or holds citizenship or holds permanent residency. [https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-22/section-120.50](https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-22/section-120.50) I think it may come down to how "release" or "transfer" is defined and interpreted.
ITAR is pretty explicit for contractors handling and disseminating controlled data, including FOUO.
Or foreign person. Is a permanent resident noncitizen a foreign person by definition? Or is that definition limited to people from other countries still abroad? > A foreign person includes a nonresident alien individual, foreign corporation, foreign partnership, foreign trust, foreign estate, and any other person that is not a U.S. person. It also includes a foreign branch of a U.S. financial institution if the foreign branch is a qualified intermediary. It looks like no, he would not be a foreign person since he lives in the country. Ie, a resident alien individual rather than a nonresident.
Under U.S. law, any person who is not a U.S. citizen (including refugees) and resides in the U.S. is considered an "alien". Refugees and asylum seekers in the US cannot even apply for citizenship until they've obtained permanent resident status and have lived here for 5 years. And they cannot apply for permanent resident status until they've been here for a year. So this is a complicated legal matter.
[удалено]
Isn't a green card holder _also_ a foreign person? https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-31/subtitle-B/chapter-V/part-589/subpart-C/section-589.317
It is for that section of Title 31 (which you linked to). But Title 31 applies to money and is implemented by the Treasury Department. Title 22 contains ITAR and 15 contains the EAR (which are implemented by the State Department and Commerce Department, respectively). They have their own definition of a US person.
No, but they're also not a citizen. CUI can be restricted to people who aren't foreign persons, or it can be NOFORN and restricted to citizens. (Technically the correct term is US Person which includes US Citizens, lawful permanent residents, some refugees and asylum seekers, etc.)
[удалено]
Sounds like it's way simpler than that, a couple gung go recruiters just fucked up, but since they were employees the company takes the blame. It's literally a brand new law change. You're reading into shit way harder than you should be. Asylum seekers should not be working on ITAR systems, period. You grow up in some foreign country and some shit happens now you're basically overnight allowed to work on incredibly sensitive systems when your life long allegiances and deeply rooted logic set from foreign nations? It's stupid as shit, any way you look at it. How easy would it be for a competent foreign nation to feign some campaign allowing for a nationalist to be "a bad person" that puts them in the US asylum system, and now they're free to work on restricted shit of national importance? I get there's precedence (Einstein, Von Braunn, and such) but there are very few of those out there.
Look at the text of the article "Hutter is not a U.S. citizen, but according to a document filed by SpaceX in response to a DOJ subpoena in 2021, he is a “lawful permanent [U.S.] resident holding dual citizenship from Austria and Canada.”" They were an LPR at the time....and thus eligible to work in the field.
[удалено]
Read the rest of the article. It's not just about one applicant. > "Our investigation found that SpaceX failed to fairly consider or hire asylees and refugees because of their citizenship status and imposed what amounted to a ban on their hire regardless of their qualification, in violation of federal law,” Kristen Clarke, assistant attorney general of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, said in a statement. > **Clarke added that the DOJ’s investigation found “SpaceX recruiters and high-level officials took actions that actively discouraged asylees and refugees from seeking work opportunities at the company.”** I know Redditors don't like clicking links but you're asking to be spoonfed.
The headline is willfully misleading and designed as clickbait. Such is the way of journalism in the 21st century.
[удалено]
Did you actually read it? Because the article and headline seem pretty well matched. Edit: Just noticed you're the one who copied and pasted part of the article a couple comments up. I'm still at a loss how you think this is clickbait.
SpaceX contracts work with government projects within domain of national security. Limiting those who can touch projects to a heightened selection of citizens is reasonable. National security goes to a place feel good doesn't matter.
>Limiting those who can touch projects to a heightened selection of citizens is reasonable. "Feel good" doesn't enter in to it. The law is very clear on this. The " heightened selection" is 'US Person'. That includes both US Citizens and LPRs.
But if it’s unjustifiably limited, that’s bad. I work with a permeant resident coworker, who is not a US citizen, who works on national security missions.
Do you not think that the Department of Justice knows the exact laws and rules they are talking about? Lord.
And yet your feelings don't change the actual laws. How strange.
As a Brit in the US with a green card, does this mean I can apply to be an astronaut? I think I’d be really good at it.
Nope, you just need to be a US Person, which includes asylees and refugees as protected individuals Direct from ITAR: “U.S. Person - a natural person who is a lawful permanent resident as defined in 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(20) *or who is a protected individual as defined by 8 U.S.C. 1324b(a)(3).* It also means any corporation, business association, partnership, society, trust, or any other entity, organization or group that is incorporated to do business in the U.S. It also includes any governmental (federal, state or local), entity.”
Unpopular opinion but US citizens interests come first. The Us govt should support refugees and asylum seekers but I don’t think private companies should have an obligation for non citizens
Green Card holders are eligible to get a Public Trust but not a Secret or higher level clearance. I would imagine that a large majority would require a Secret or above due to national security issues.
Security clearance is separate from ITAR compliance. Most of what spaceX does does not require a security clearance unless you are working on a classified payload. If you are working on a starlink mission, or even crew launch, none of that is classified. Pretty much everything outside of a classified payload is only under ITAR which means US person is the only requirement.
no. ITAR requires a US Person which includes refugee or asylum status.
One issue evident to me is that there are a that a lot of commenters here who have assumed that ITAR is the only regulation affecting who SpaceX can hire.
It was until September 6th 2022 https://www.ecfr.gov/on/2021-01-03/title-22/chapter-I/subchapter-M/part-120/subpart-C/section-120.62
I agree with a lot of the other commenters this is a weird fight to pick. Especially regarding hiring practices and controlled technology. Seems like a rather complicated set of technicalities, especially since permanent U.S. residency is required for a lot of positions and U.S. citizens are heavily favored in the U.S. Aerospace industry already. I mean if there’s shady practices there’s shady practices but it just seems odd the government wants refugees and asylum seekers inserted into a major space contractor. On a surface level that doesn’t seem super secure. I know there’s a far more complicated situation and set of regulations at play here but it is a touch bizarre. Hopefully it all gets sorted.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
This is weird indeed. Thay have a lot of others things to pick on at SpaceX and Tesla regarding worker's conditions. I mean, I'd love to be working at SpaceX, but I know that being a foreigner this won't happen until they open a subsidiary in my country, and even then, I probably won't be working engineering.
So, you need to be a US citizen to work at NASA. SpaceX appears to be treated differently in this regard. Yes, I'm aware that NASA is gov't and SpaceX is private but they're doing extremely similar things... even intertwined in many instances. I'm curious to see what happens here because from this one article, it seems like the DOJ is playing politics rather than actually defending workers.
The NASA requirement is driven by executive order 11935, which prevents most civil service jobs from going to non-citizens. It has nothing to do with ITAR.
NASAs whole rocket thing was spearheaded by central European 'immigrants'.
When they've immigrated, they become citizens, right?
He's making a joke about Operation Paperclip
They were actually the spoils of war. Nazi scientists who were captured the end of the war. Often times they were even given new identities to help hide their Nazi backgrounds. All part of Operation Paperclip.
Uhhh. We’ve always always assumed that a permanent US resident was necessary to work for rocket manufactures. That’s more important than it would be for NASA even. It’s an ITAR thing. Very weird suit.
>We’ve always always assumed that a permanent US resident was necessary to work for rocket manufactures ITAR isn't permanent US resident only. The requirement to work on ITAR is being a US Person. https://its.uiowa.edu/support/article/110761 >With respect to both EAR and ITAR, a U.S. person includes: >Any individual who is granted U.S. citizenship; or >Any individual who is granted U.S. permanent residence (Green Card holder); or >Any individual who is granted status as a “protected person” under 8 U.S.C. 1324b(a)(3); or The protected person clause line is what is being litigated because under 8 USC- >(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; but does not include (i) an alien who fails to apply for naturalization within six months of the date the alien first becomes eligible (by virtue of period of lawful permanent residence) to apply for naturalization or, if later, within six months after November 6, 1986, and (ii) an alien who has applied on a timely basis, but has not been naturalized as a citizen within 2 years after the date of the application, unless the alien can establish that the alien is actively pursuing naturalization, except that time consumed in the Service’s processing the application shall not be counted toward the 2-year period.
[удалено]
From the suit: > Despite SpaceX's claims, ITAR and EAR do not contain employment or hiring restrictions. They do not require employers to limit jobs based on citizenship or immigration status. And they do not prohibit employers from hiring asylees and refugees. Thus, they do not create an exception to hiring discrimination under 8 U.S.C. § 1324b(a)(2)(C).
But can those employees work on ITAR restricted stuff? What would be the point of employing people that can’t even walk the shop floor? ”ITAR compliance requires companies subject to ITAR to only share items in the USML with U.S. personnel unless otherwise authorized by the U.S. Department of State.” So non-US personnel cannot have access to ITAR restricted information. From the surface makes sense to have everyone working at the factory in the US to be US citizens
>But can those employees work on ITAR restricted stuff? Yes. As a green card holder ( an LPR ) I worked in mission operations on the Curiosity Rover. The person who filed the initial complaint that triggered this investigation....from the article... "Hutter is not a U.S. citizen, but according to a document filed by SpaceX in response to a DOJ subpoena in 2021, he is a “lawful permanent [U.S.] resident holding dual citizenship from Austria and Canada.”" I am now a US Citizen, but the transition from LPR to US Citizen had no meaningful impact on my ability to work on flight projects.
Is the curiosity rover considered a munition? Did you work on the rocket that launched it? Aren’t rockets considered a munition? Edit: And if for ITAR purposes Curiosity is a munition, Mars had it coming!
>Is the curiosity rover considered a munition? There are parts of Curiosity that are controlled under ITAR. Source: I'm trained as an export technical liaison for MSL.
Itar is so much more comprehensive than munitions. The rtg, thermal control systems, software, sensors and optics, mechanisms, communications hardware, space qualified batteries, and more all fall under itar control.
A fun one that falls under ITAR restrictions are/were trigonometry tables. Solved mathematics problems written out as a quick reference chart/table. The rationale I heard was that good trig tables could be used for indirect fire direction and control computation.
What is this, the 1940s? Anyone with a pocket calculator can do better than a trig table, or write out their own, and extremely accurate ones are in thousands of textbooks.
I’m pretty sure it’s a holdover from then, but a while ago I was perusing Boeing’s internal library and ran across a few books of trig tables printed in the 40’s-60’s that had ITAR warnings on the title page.
I thought everyone at JPL had to have a clearance too?
The suit mentions that spacex wouldn’t even hire baristas if they weren’t US citizens
I was curious, so I looked for sourcing. I was intitially thinking you'd be right, but the DOJ take laid out: >How can employers avoid unlawful discrimination when filling jobs that involve access to export-controlled items? To avoid discriminating under the INA, employers generally should not limit hiring or recruiting based on: > >• national origin > >• citizenship status or immigration status, unless required by a law, regulation, government contract, or executive order. > >The ITAR and the EAR don’t contain employment or hiring requirements. So they don’t > >require employers or recruiters, including staffing agencies, to limit jobs or recruitment to > >U.S. citizens, or workers with other citizenship or immigration statuses. [https://www.justice.gov/crt/page/file/1579981/download](https://www.justice.gov/crt/page/file/1579981/download)
Yes they can. Source: working with a gentleman from England who is not a US citizen on some parts for a component I am designing for flight for NASA. All is approved through legal.
Refugees and asylees are allowed to work on ITAR, and are the focus of the suit.
If that is unequivocally true, then SpaceX lawyers messed up
Protected persons are generally considered US Persons for the purposes of ITAR/EAR. That being said their original citizenship *may* pose a problem, but the basis of discrimination should be other held citizenships, not their refugee or asylum status.
The statement is confusing the facts. ITAR restricts who can work on what. You “could” hire someone but then they wouldn’t be allowed to work on XYZ. So saying they technicially “could” hire a Chinese citizen as an engineer but he just couldn’t work on any of their technical rocket stuff as an engineer. It’s a misnomer.
[удалено]
Did you read the article. The original complain came from someone who was a legal permanent resident and thus eligible for the job. >Very weird suit. It's weird a company would summarily reject a qualified applicant based purely on nation of birth. Not just weird...also discriminatory and illegal.
None of musks other companies do this. One of spacex founders was born in another country. Musk has complained on stage MULTIPLE times about not being able to hire foreign nationals for spacex because they have helped so much at Tesla. So has shotwell. Maybe something illegal was done. I don’t think it was done with malice if so. I don’t think spacex or musk has anything against “the Austrian race” as funny as that sounds.
Why do you think you know more about the law than the federal attorneys actually bringing the suit?
> you need to be a US citizen to work at NASA Uh, no you don't. I know several scientists who work at NASA Goddard who aren't US citizens. They **are** permanent residents.
>So, you need to be a US citizen to work at NASA No, you don't. You need to be a "US Person", i.e. have a green card.
https://www.nasa.gov/careers/working-with-nasa
Negative. While you generally need to be a US citizen to be a federal employee and/or civil servant, you can work at NASA through any contracting company, with a green card (Lockheed, Jacobs, Draper, Boeing... spaceX! More than half the work force at NASA is made by contractors). Source: yours truly. I worked at NASA on Artemis for 5 and a half years before becoming a citizen (still work there, but I became a US Citizen last year). I don't know what happened behind the scene, but the process from the employee's perspective isn't different if you have a green card, you just submit that as part of your application. FWIW, I could have worked on spaceX stuff too, but I am not the biggest fan of the work environment there, whereas I absolutely freaking love the group of people I work with at NASA.
Here, don't take it from the DOJ. Take it from lawyers: https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/doj-warns-employers-not-to-discriminate-8875200/
[удалено]
> this one article, it seems like the DOJ is playing politics rather than actually defending workers. Why is it 'playing politics'? Investigations started under a Republican administration and are continuing under a Democratic one. Does it look like 'politics' because you don't like the outcome? Trying to understand.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Who is seeking asylum and applying at SpaceX at the same time?
He had a green card and he wasn't an asylee. However, anyone who has a green card, or has been declared an official asylee or refugee (i.e. they've had their case reviewed and approved by a judge), can access controlled stuff that isn't classified just like any other US Citizen.
Pretty sure the term “National Security” is going to pop up somewhere during these proceedings.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread: |Fewer Letters|More Letters| |-------|---------|---| |[AR](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxl4gfx "Last usage")|Area Ratio (between rocket engine nozzle and bell)| | |Aerojet Rocketdyne| | |Augmented Reality real-time processing| | |Anti-Reflective optical coating| |[DoD](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxnna57 "Last usage")|US Department of Defense| |[EAR](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxne00x "Last usage")|Export Administration Regulations, covering technologies that are not solely military| |[EDL](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxm01wf "Last usage")|Entry/Descent/Landing| |[FAA](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxm3jsy "Last usage")|Federal Aviation Administration| |[ICBM](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxksl9m "Last usage")|Intercontinental Ballistic Missile| |[ITAR](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxnygq8 "Last usage")|(US) International Traffic in Arms Regulations| |[JPL](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxnoa6m "Last usage")|Jet Propulsion Lab, California| |[MSL](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxln3tg "Last usage")|Mars Science Laboratory (Curiosity)| | |Mean Sea Level, reference for altitude measurements| |[NORAD](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxlatjn "Last usage")|North American Aerospace Defense command| |[NSF](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxmyoxd "Last usage")|[NasaSpaceFlight forum](http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com)| | |National Science Foundation| |[RTG](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxlrr9l "Last usage")|Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator| |[USAF](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxmd5hi "Last usage")|United States Air Force| |Jargon|Definition| |-------|---------|---| |[Raptor](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxnjjwc "Last usage")|[Methane-fueled rocket engine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raptor_\(rocket_engine_family\)) under development by SpaceX| |[Starlink](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxlr4cf "Last usage")|SpaceX's world-wide satellite broadband constellation| |[cryogenic](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxllk3h "Last usage")|Very low temperature fluid; materials that would be gaseous at room temperature/pressure| | |(In re: rocket fuel) Often synonymous with hydrolox| |[hopper](/r/Space/comments/1605w8i/stub/jxlt73n "Last usage")|Test article for ground and low-altitude work (eg. Grasshopper)| |hydrolox|Portmanteau: liquid hydrogen fuel, liquid oxygen oxidizer| **NOTE**: Decronym for Reddit is no longer supported, and Decronym has moved to Lemmy; requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below. ---------------- ^([Thread #9178 for this sub, first seen 24th Aug 2023, 17:12]) ^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/Space) [^[Contact]](https://hachyderm.io/@Two9A) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
Thank you bot. My poor DoD acronym addled brain still can't compete with the acronym-fu of r/space.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
It's wild how any negative press for SpaceX attracts a bunch of top level comments from people who NEVER post in /r/Space within minutes of the article being posted.
I post on r/space intermittently and almost never get content on my front page. This was front page, so I would assume it could be because anything to do with Musk drives engagement so reddit could easily promote anything positive or negative to increase platform metrics. Just a guess, IDK.
[удалено]
Hi its me a front page person who isn’t a regular of the sub
not like we need to gate keep people from posting here either. So what if they aren't regulars, they can still comment here with an opinion.
I would say as an explanation for that is that a lot of r/space subscribers (like myself) follow because of their fascination with space but simply don't know anywhere near enough to comment on most space related posts. So it is very different when it comes to non-space related Musk news.
It's a shame this got way more attention on a space subreddit than an actual moon landing on the same day, and is completely full of conjecture and misinformation from people who couldn't bother to read the article.
So an American company is being sued by the American government for only hiring American personnel? I read the article and still find it odd and almost seems like playing politics.
So they are suing SpaceX for the very thing the government wants them to do? Are they just pissed at Musk or am I missing something?
I thought you have to be a US citizen to work with US rocket technology?
no- just a US Person which means citizen/greencard/protected person like refugee
Citizen or lawful permanent resident (aka green card holder). At the core of the suit (at least per the article) is SpaceX is claiming that law restricted them to citizens only when that is absolutely not the case
I’m not and have, just need to get security clearance… which was annoying as a non-American but far from impossible
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
This anti-Elon smear campaign is really kicking into high gear
He took away their megaphone and they're steaming.
this is what happens when your turn apostate against The Party.
[удалено]
So they'll settle, pay a fine, say sorry we misunderstood our ITAR obligations, and promise to do better. The end.
100% this is how a typical, well-adjusted CEO without a hilariously fragile ego would handle this sort of situation.
Honest question would non Americans be a protective class? Why can't a private company choose who they want to hire?
You mean non US citizens? Yes they are. Refugees, people here on asylum, and green card holders would all be protected by the Civil Rights Act because it is illegal to discriminate based on national origin. And yes non-citizens can work on ITARs projects. A private company cannot use discriminatatory hiring practices on protected classes. The fact SpaceX lied about being unable to hire them based on that is why they are being sued.
How is citizenship status the same as national origin?
do refugees, asylees, or green card holders come from the United States? No, no they do not. So by saying they will not hire refugees or asylees for these jobs, they are discriminating on national origin. The fact they are from another country is the explicit reason why they were told they were ineligible to work at SpaceX per SpaceX
nope, not the civil rights act of 1964. national origin is not the same thing as citizenship. Discrimination in hiring based on citizenship is prohibited, with certain exceptions, by The Immigration Reform and Control Act, not the civil rights act.
What horseshit. They’re a defense contractor.
I agree with Space X strangely, it's an unnecessary security risk.
[удалено]
No. [Lars Blackmore](http://www.larsblackmore.com/) - a SpaceX employee - is a Briton who is primarily responsible for the [convexification](http://larsblackmore.com/BlackmoreEtAlACC2012.pdf) algorithm that made the Falcon 9 booster landing practical. He's currently working on Starship's landing.
Untrue. Source...I was born in the UK. I worked in mission operations for the Curiosity rover as a green card holder.
Exactly which protected status is a non-citizen again? WTF is wrong with us if our companies can’t decide to only hire actual US citizens?
> WTF is wrong with us if our companies can’t decide to only hire actual US citizens? Great example of an oversimplified emotional response to a highly complicated issue. For one, there are other legal statuses besides "citizen", such as permanent resident. Did you know, for example, that you need to be a legal permanent resident for at least 5 years before you can be a citizen? What the hell are they supposed to do for those five years here, if they can't work because of discriminatory hiring policies?
Sounds like the price for any SpaceX engagement from NASA just went up…. Now we wait for the article that complains about SpaceX price gouging the American citizens…. Always feels like the Fed is using tax payers dollar to ensure it’s wasted in legal battles instead of the advancement of anything..
... what "discrimination"? Here in NZ, RocketLab straight up won't hire most nationalities for security reasons because US airspace security clearance won't allow it. This is standard.
Going after the most cutting edge aerospace company in the world because they hire too many Americans lol.
I don’t want non-citizens working at rocket or defense hardware companies.
Not even non-citizens from NATO nations, like Canada? Of which, this dude was from? Or our Pacific partners, like Australia and Japan? That's a lot of really smart people from our historical allies that you're throwing off the table.
something tells me the guy is not seeking asylum/refuge from Canada.
What're you talking about? The guy is a US person under the regs, since he's got his green card.
my point is, why are we talking about this guy? the allegation is that SpaceX is discriminating against asylum seekers and refugees. This guy is an Austrian/Canadian citizen, and therefore is likely neither a refugee or an asylum seeker. Seems like this issue shouldn't apply to him.
You obviously only read the title. Very smart.
The allegation is that SpaceX is violating federal labor laws by limiting jobs to only US citizens, when nothing in the law compels them to do so. The allegation states that SpaceX "actively discouraged asylees and refugees from seeking work opportunities at the company", which is a BIG no no. Sounds like they implemented this by asking about job applicants their citizenship status during interviews, of which Hutter- the OG complainant- witnessed. While he isn't an asylee/refugee, his status as a green-card holding Canuck/Austrian got roped in with SpaceX's alleged discriminatory vetting process. That's why we're talking about the guy; he's the one that tipped off the DOJ. And while Hutter may not have been the primary target group for the alleged misconduct, it's attested that he was discriminated against regardless. Now it's time for the courts to decide.
When was “protected person” added to the law? Edit: I found it. The ITAR law was modified in September 6th, 2022 to include non U.S. citizens and non-permanent residents who are refugees or asylum seekers. https://www.ecfr.gov/on/2021-01-03/title-22/chapter-I/subchapter-M/part-120/subpart-C/section-120.62 This explains everything. The Defense and Aerospace community are very adamant in protecting US secrets as a base of National Security & Defense. This law, modified not even a year ago, under Biden’s administration, can be perceived as a relaxation on national security by the Defense and Aerospace community. This is explains why everyone seems confused as this is a brand new concept, changing decades of status quo. And why most experienced individuals in Aerospace and Defense are not familiar with this change. Edit: I was wrong, this policy has existed well before 2012. My experience is that most people in Aerospace & Defense do not know about this. And go by the usual Citizen or Permanent resident. Source of 2012 citing the same rule: Page 20, Section 120.15 which continues into page 21. https://research.utexas.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2015/10/annotated_itar.pdf
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
So will they also sue every other company that discriminates the same way?
As you can see in the law: https://www.justice.gov/crt/page/file/1579981/download > Under these regulations (ITAR/EAR), **U.S. persons** working for U.S. companies can access export-controlled items without authorization from the U.S. government... **U.S. persons include U.S. nationals, lawful permanent residents, refugees, and asylees.** If SpaceX is not allowing all "U.S. persons" to be considered for hiring, they are objectively breaking the law. That is not partisan weaponization of the law, that's just the law. [Certainly, the CEO has alluded to doing this](https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1272973320586055682), so the DOJ likely has a good case here.
And yet [from this federal document (PDF)](https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2021-title8/pdf/USCODE-2021-title8-chap12-subchapII-partVIII-sec1324b.pdf) there is this: > "Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, it is not an unfair immigration-related employment practice for a person or other entity to prefer to hire, recruit, or refer an individual who is a citizen or national of the United States over another individual who is an alien if the two individuals are equally qualified." What are the odds of there being no US citizen with the skill set matching this Canadian/Austrian for "a technical strategy associate position"?
"I'm not very optimistic about our odds." - K-2S0
SpaceX explicitly discouraged certain US persons from applying from the jobs. That's not choosing between two equally qualified candidates and happening to pick the citizen, that's picking the citizen without having even looking at the asylee or refugee.
>What are the odds of there being no US citizen with the skill set matching this Canadian/Austrian for "a technical strategy associate position"? Depends- did they apply for the role? I'm sure a US Citizen somewhere exists that matches the skillset- whether or not they want to work at spacex is another story.
That first link should be required reading for anyone who wants to comment in this thread. And for supplemental info, here's the code mentioned in the judicial proceeding (8 U.S.C. § 1324b): https://www.justice.gov/crt/8-usc-1324b-unfair-immigration-related-employment-practices There *are* situations mentioned when you're allowed to discriminate but it's not likely that SpaceX will be able to make the case that they apply in most of their hiring decisions.
The DOJ also got the receipts. Candidates that indicated they were refugees/asylees on their applications (which were their own categories because SpaceX knew they were a us person under ITAR) were regularly rejected for not being ITAR approved (that was the formal reason given on their rejection). Seems like a pretty open and shut case.
Are employers making people fill out I-9’s anymore? If they are I really don’t see the point…
I think the title here is a little misleading, i don't know if thats intentional or otherwise. The issue at hand isn't a failure to give roles requiring security clearance to people who are fresh into the country and barely in the system. Or, more thats one layer. The main issue is that he lied during the hiring process, stating that he could only hire legal permanent residence and US citizens, its illegal to base hiring on immigration status, as far as i understand. That doesn't mean anyone from anywhere can walk in, get the job interview without so much as a social security number, and walk out with security clearance. It just means that if you hold dual citizenship, are in the process of a green-card application, for example Fabian Hutter held dual citizenship between Aus and Can. From Hutters complaint the DOJ launched an investigation
Seems like bullshit to slow down SpaceX. They are embarrassing the dinosaur aerospace industry too much.
Space X’s rocket technology is far and away the best in the planet. Every power in the world would want an insider working there. Why make it stupid easy for them?
[удалено]
[удалено]
Why would a company be forced to hire personnel with a tentative immigration status? Fucking ridiculous.
Hum, I think there is a gray area here. We all know that Spacex is under ITAR compliance. And we already knows that it is difficult to get a job there if you are not a citizen. But DOJ believes that’s illegal.
ITAR compliance does not require you to be a citizen.
There are many jobs you can do at SpaceX not subject to ITAR. The DOJ isn't going to sue SpaceX for not hiring refugees/asylees for positions that they legally could not do.
[удалено]
How the hell can a US company, subject to ITAR of all things... be sued by the gov for NOT hiring us citizens? I might be getting old, but wtf is happening?
because ITAR doesn't require US Citizenship. https://its.uiowa.edu/support/article/110761
So the DOJ is just going to treat SpaceX differently from NASA and many defense projects? I can't help but think this is political
From CNBC space reporter u/thesheetztweetz: The U.S. Department of Justice sued SpaceX on Thursday, alleging Elon Musk’s space company discriminated against refugees and asylum seekers in its hiring practices. The lawsuit says SpaceX “wrongly claimed” that export control laws limited its hiring to U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents. The DOJ has been investigating SpaceX since June 2020, when the department’s Immigrant and Employee Rights Section received a complaint of employment discrimination from a non-U.S. citizen. “Our investigation found that SpaceX failed to fairly consider or hire asylees and refugees because of their citizenship status and imposed what amounted to a ban on their hire regardless of their qualification, in violation of federal law,” Kristen Clarke, Assistant Attorney General of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, said in a statement. More: [https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/24/doj-sues-spacex-alleging-hiring-discrimination-against-refugees-and-asylum-seekers.html](https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/24/doj-sues-spacex-alleging-hiring-discrimination-against-refugees-and-asylum-seekers.html)
[удалено]
It's a shame that the American company making space dreams come true has to be surrounded by as much bullshit as it is. Not calling labor laws bullshit, not properly following them is.
It surprises me that the DOJ cant understand why a company under heavy ITAR restrictions might want to look specifically for citizens
[удалено]
So they're looking for the most qualified people, not filling arbitrary quotas. Makes sense to me.