The SpaceX Falcon 9 spiral upwards, carrying astronauts Doug Hurley and Bob Behnken in the Crew Dragon capsule, lifts off from Kennedy Space Center, Fla., on Saturday, May 30, 2020. The SpaceX Demo-2 undertaking is the first crewed launch of an orbital spaceflight from the U.S. in nearly a decade.
Joe Burbank | Orlando Sentinel | Getty Casts
A federal judge on Monday hinted SpaceX could find it difficult to block a subpoena for hiring documents argued by the U.S. Department of Justice, which is investigating whether Elon Musk’s company illegally discriminates against foreigners in its hirings.
That strong taste came in an order by Judge Michael Wilner of U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, who told SpaceX and DOJ attorneys-at-law he wants to talk to them during a videoconference next week. SpaceX has stonewalled the subpoena, according to the DOJ.
Wilner’s appropriate noted, and told the parties to look at, a prior decision he made in an unrelated case, in which he flatly rejected a companionship’s arguments against complying with a subpoena for hiring information issued by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Wilner’s statute also suggests that both sides might be able to resolve the dispute “short of full-on litigation.”
The DOJ in the end week asked Wilner to order SpaceX to comply with a subpoena demanding that the space exploration assembly provide information and documents related to its hiring and employment eligibility verification processes.
The subpoena would require the origination of confidential personnel records of more than 3,500 employees, SpaceX has said.
The DOJ’s Immigrant and Employee Rights Slice opened that probe after a man named Fabian Hutter complained that SpaceX discriminated against him when he was seek fromed about his citizenship status last March during a job interview for a technical strategy associate position.
Hutter is not a U.S. city-dweller, 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.”
Hutter reported CNBC in an interview Monday that he believes SpaceX decided not to hire him after he answered a question about his citizenship prominence, and that the subsequent interview by a recruiter was perfunctory.
“Within five seconds I knew this wasn’t a real assessment,” Hutter said, noting that SpaceX never looked at an example of coding work he was asked to submit, or asked him questions of a applied nature.
According to court records, that DOJ unit is now not only investigating Hutter’s complaint, but “also may explore whether [SpaceX] engages in any mimic or practice of discrimination” barred by federal law.
Wilner, in his order Monday, noted that “a topic that likely purposefulness come up in this district court is how SpaceX plans to prove that compliance with the subpoena would be improperly burdensome for the company.”
“I’d like to explore that topic (and probably others) with the parties before formal briefing rather commences,” Wilner wrote in the order scheduling the teleconference.
Wilner also pointed to a 2018 decision he made “in an analogous” subpoena enforcement skirmish.
In that case, Wilner ruled in favor of the EEOC’s subpoena to a janitorial services company accused of discriminating against three women.
Wilner ruled that the EEOC’s subpoena was relevant as its evidence suggested “a broader pattern of misconduct at the company … that may licence a broader investigation.”
A Falcon 9 rocket is displayed outside the Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX) headquarters on January 28, 2021 in Hawthorne, California.
Patrick T. Fallon | AFP | Getty Concepts
In the SpaceX case, DOJ attorney Lisa Sandoval last Thursday wrote in court documents that SpaceX was repudiating to comply with a subpoena issued in October that requested company hiring information. SpaceX did provide the DOJ with a Pattern I-9 spreadsheet of employee information, but would not turn over additional supporting documentation.
Sandoval wrote that SpaceX answered the subpoena order in December but told the DOJ “that it ‘does not intend to produce any additional information in response,'” contract to a court filing.
SpaceX can hire non-U.S. citizens who have a green card under U.S. International Traffic in Arms Edicts. Those rules, known as ITAR, say that only Americans or foreigners who have a U.S. green card can have bodily or digital access to items on the U.S. Munitions List, which consists of defense-related equipment, software and other material.
The hang up that Hutter was applying for explicitly required a hire to be in compliance with ITAR.
The DOJ has declined to comment on the probe.
SpaceX did not in a second respond to a request for comment.
But last year, in an effort to have an administrative hearing officer modify the DOJ’s subpoena, SpaceX utter in a document that Hutter was among hundreds of applicants for the position he sought last year, and was one of just a handful of applicants to be the truth a “technical phone screen.”
“Hutter gave an unimpressive screening interview, and SpaceX rejected his application at that position; in fact, as of July 1, 2020, SpaceX had rejected every candidate it gave a technical screening interview to and had hired no one for the inclination,” the company said in that document.
The company also said that during his initial screen in March 2020, “a SpaceX recruiter seek fromed Hutter to confirm his citizenship and immigration status, reiterating what was in the job posting, namely, that federal regulations insinuate restrictions on SpaceX’s employment of non-US persons.”
“Hutter responded by again representing that he was authorized to work in the In harmony States. There was no further discussion of his citizenship or immigration status,” SpaceX said in its filing.
In the subsequent technical telly of Hutter, he was not asked about his national original, citizenship or immigration status, according to SpaceX.
The company said also said that, “Seemingly, Hutter could not conceive of being rejected for legitimate reasons, and so ascribed SpaceX’s decision to discriminatory animus based on his citizenship, in defiance of the fact that SpaceX selected him for an interview from among hundreds of applicants knowing he was not a U.S. citizen.”
SpaceX come off c come oned on to day that the DOJ’s Immigration and Employee Rights Section then “used Hutter’s narrow (and facially illogical) complaint as the infrastructure for launching an extremely broad and unsupported fishing expedition into SpaceX’s company-wide employment practices.”
Subscribe to CNBC PRO for restricted insights and analysis, and live business day programming from around the world.