back to article Uncle Sam accuses SpaceX of not considering asylees and refugees for employment

Fresh from blowing up a small portion of Texas with Starship, SpaceX is once again being forced to focus on more earthly matters, like discriminatory hiring practices, in a lawsuit brought by the US Department of Justice. The complaint [PDF] filed Wednesday through the Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer, part …

  1. martinusher Silver badge

    Doesn't make sense -- honest

    When I came to work in the US these sorts of companies were "citizens only" -- I think the reason I got work here was that the Reagan era military buildup literally sucked all the citizen engineers out of industry leaving a vacuum for us aliens. Over the years the rules seem to have relaxed to 'ciziens and legal permanent resident" but the idea's still there. You need to have a stake in the country to be working on its sensitive technology (and SpaceX does have sensitive technology). SpaceX's policies in this regard are right on the money even without the rather nitpicky questions about qualifications and whether people allowed into the country temporarily are actually seeking to immigrate (in theory someone seeking asylum is just looking for a safe country to stay in, they're not would-be immigrants seeming to game the system by bypassing immigration rules. ("Wink, wink......."))

    1. abend0c4

      Re: Doesn't make sense -- honest

      a vacuum for us aliens

      I vaguely recall hearing somewhere that space was supposed to be the final frontier.

    2. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      Re: Doesn't make sense -- honest

      Working in the USA I've even been to civilian suppliers. that wouldn't let me on-site as a customer because I wasn't a US citizen, because they did work for the USAF.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Doesn't make sense -- honest

      Who knew all the hordes of refuges and asylum seekers crossing into Europe and the US has so many Rocket Scientists & Rocket Engineers?

      But as others have pointed out, many companies in the US have requirements for ITAR compliance as well as National Security requirements due to the nature of their technogy. I work for one such company. We don't certify anything as MIL SPEC, yet military contractors buy a lot of our high-tech OEM products that they put into systems that do get certified for MIL SPEC and go into NATO militaries. As such, the US does limit who we can hire and what we can sell to whom.

      It would be hard to imagine that SpaceX's missile/rocket technology isn't controlled.

      1. Insert sadsack pun here Silver badge

        Re: Doesn't make sense -- honest

        "It would be hard to imagine that SpaceX's missile/rocket technology isn't controlled."

        Maybe yes, maybe no. But just because the technology is export controlled, that doesn't mean a) that everyone working at SpaceX has access to it, and b) that only US citizens and permanent residents may have access to it.

        A blanket ban on hiring certain people who are lawfully entitled to work in the US is illegal unless there is a laeful exception - as the complaint makes clear.

    4. EricB123 Bronze badge

      Re: Doesn't make sense -- honest

      Yes, I remember during the Reagan era military buildup everyone who worked for the DOE, any company that did any business with any branch of the military, et al had to be a US citizen.

      Apparently the bureaucracy has swelled in size to where different government branches have different rules on how to keep America "safe".

  2. Boris the Cockroach Silver badge

    As someone

    who tried to get green card status.....

    This seems rather iffy.... because it was made clear that getting the green card was dependent on being able to do a job position that a US citizen could'nt fill. of course this led to the other thing.

    To get that sort of a job offer was dependent on already having a green card...........

    But it could have been an occupation that the US was short of, sadly manufacturing engineers were not needed as the great outsourcing to china rush was on..............

    Remind me again how that went?

    1. Malcolm Weir

      Re: As someone

      I wonder if you're misremembering something: the "unfilled job position" thing sounds more like an H-1B visa.

      There are a whole bunch of ways to get a green card, including family, and (relevant here) refugee/asylum status. But one of the mechanisms is the "employment" one, but that doesn't require the same level of scrutiny as the H-1B; if you can show you're exceptional in some way, or a multinational manager or do a job that requires an advanced degree, you get higher preference than people without, but only when you get down to the "unskilled worker" level (generally) do you need a labor certification, but those are not quite the same as the H-1B certifications in various mysterious immigration ways!

    2. MachDiamond Silver badge

      Re: As someone

      "because it was made clear that getting the green card was dependent on being able to do a job position that a US citizen could'nt fill."

      Becoming a permanent resident (getting a green card) isn't dependent on being able to do a job that can't be filled by a citizen or other permanent resident. What you describe is qualifying for a work visa (H1-b, etc). Many people get permanent resident status before being granted citizenship. Some never become citizens.

      1. GB31

        Re: As someone

        You can qualify for a green card via work or family :

        The benefit of the work based route is that you can get the card as soon as you are approved - depending on the remaining quota for your country of origin (people form India and China might have to wait 9-15 years after they are approved!).

        I got a my green card last year and my employers had to prove that no citizen was suitable for my job.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Cult of Elon

    I wonder if SpaceXs HR department didn't understand the rules (they should have done), or understood the rules but followed Musk's personal interpretation rather than object.

    The ability of HR to speak truth to power is important for the protection of the company and the workers.

    I note the DOJ filing says there were 10,000 hires during the period in question, this is not a "small company" thing

    1. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

      Re: Cult of Elon

      Cult of every US rocket company.

      We have heard about this complaint against SpaceX. We do not know is SpaceX has been singled out for doing what other rocket companies are doing or if those others are/will be dragged in front of a judge too. Some aerospace companies can have separate work areas for people excluded by ITAR. For some it is impractical and the law is written to accept that.

      Courts take time to collect evidence and review the law. It would be so much easier to just decide someone is guilty and lock them up.

      1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        Re: Cult of Elon

        Based on some peoples experience posted above, even if only anecdotal, it make me wonder if this is a common misconception or deliberate rule-bending amongst US employers and not specifically a SpaceX issue, only making it into El Regs pages because it's SpaceX in this case.

      2. Paul Hovnanian Silver badge

        Re: Cult of Elon

        "Courts take time to collect evidence and review the law."


        Lets wait until the case is heard and the courts realize that there is a conflict between ITAR and immigration law which was heretofore not anticipated.

        1. MachDiamond Silver badge

          Re: Cult of Elon

          "Lets wait until the case is heard and the courts realize that there is a conflict between ITAR and immigration law which was heretofore not anticipated."

          It isn't even likely that the case will get to trial. It will be dismissed on Motion since ITAR is a more serious issue than employment law and will take precedent. I wouldn't be surprise if NASA submitted an amicus brief to the court since they share sensitive information with SpaceX.

    2. MachDiamond Silver badge

      Re: Cult of Elon

      "I wonder if SpaceXs HR department didn't understand the rules"

      It appears that they DO understand the hiring restrictions there are for aerospace companies. SpaceX has a very high turnover so 10,000 hires isn't 10,000 positions filled. It could be 3,000 positions filled 3+ times each.

      I've worked in aerospace and we had to complete courses about ITAR topics to make sure we all stayed compliant. The COO wanted to start using Google Docs and found out he'd be personally up for charges if certain information was stored off-site and leaked. It was rather pointless anyway as we already had an internal network for documents and plenty of licenses for M$ Office to go around. Sharing our work with Google would be a rookie move.

    3. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

      Re: Cult of Elon

      Sounds to me like Musk just made up his own interpretation rather than checking with the lawyers. There's no excuse for SpaceX getting this wrong.

    4. very angry man

      Re: Cult of Elon

      Look, I just need to learn how to take off and fly, don't need to land, rockets hit harder than planes, but lack the 300 screaming passages

  4. FIA Silver badge

    Okay... I know this site stopped being British a long time ago... but...


    Really?? Is that the new word for asylum seekers now???

    <sigh> I'm too old.

    1. IGotOut Silver badge

      No unfortunately, it's the continuation of the dumbing down of the US language. Why write two words when you can create a dumbed down single word?

      1. FIA Silver badge

        Thing is, I get that language evolves, and a lot of these things are personal preference. Words do tend to meld over time after all. But it really feels like one of those examples where an innocuous term has been turned into one that sounds like it could be used in a derogatory fashion.

        Asylum seekers are people who've got shit enough lives that they'll often take quite considerable risks to get a better life for themselves and their families somewhere where they're less likely to be persecuted or killed.

        "Asylees" feels like it reduces the human suffering somewhat and turns it into a term that could be used as abuse.

        With the world the way it is at the moment if feels like we could do with less of that, not more.

        1. aks

          Surely, asylees means those who have been granted asylum not those who are simply seeking it.

          1. aks

            Refugee is a looser term. Asylee is in Collins dictionary as British English meaning "a person who has been granted asylum".

            Such a person does not have allegiance to the host country although one would hope they have respect for their host.

          2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

            If they've been granted asylum, doesn't that make them residents?

            1. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

              It makes them a particular type of resident. Not all residents are asylees.

              Asylee means "someone who has sought asylum and been granted it by a sovereign nation". While it is not, to my mind, a euphonious term, I don't know of another which concisely represents that precise concept. "Asylum grantee" (in parallel with "asylum seeker") is the closest, and it's hardly a deft flick of the pen either.

      2. Vometia has insomnia. Again. Silver badge

        One of my "favourites" has to be the horrible non-word "accurized". *shudder*

        1. AMBxx Silver badge

          I'll take your accurized and raise you "Burglarized"

      3. Ian Johnston Silver badge

        Do you refer to "refuge seekers"?

      4. Hardrada

        Yunfortunately s'rite.

    2. doublelayer Silver badge

      While I don't know the word, it would seem to be quite distinct from "asylum seekers", which would include anyone who had requested asylum, no matter what state that application was in. This term would appear to be limited to those who applied for and were granted asylum. I don't really have a word or phrase to describe that particular set that's shorter than the eight I just used, but it's still valid to distinguish them from all seekers.

    3. Bebu Silver badge



      Really?? Is that the new word for asylum seekers now???》

      en_EN acquired "asylum" from Latin and the genitive happens to be "asyli" so I wonder if asylee is short for <something> asyli in some some legal Latin term.

      I concede not really likely on that side of the pond as they appear to have enough trouble with en_US and spontaneously decay into us_US but perhaps they lifted it from some Oxbridge civil servant on this side. :)

      I imagine asylees in the UK would expect to soon be resident in Rwanda~

    4. Ian Johnston Silver badge

      Since "refugee" is well established as the term for people seeking refuge, I can't see why there should be so much fuss about "asylee" for "people seeking asylum".

    5. conel

      It includes those with seeking & granted status, so quite an efficient word. This is how language works you know, people occasionally come up with new words.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Asylum isn't what it used to be

    Oddly, Musk prefers citizens to cutting labor costs, thereby, via supply and demand, ensuring better conditions for citizen workers. And THIS is what DoJ wants to make an example of?

    How about actually enforcing the Hospital Price Transparency Rule? How about the price of cancer drugs rising by 10x due to middlemen cartel?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Asylum isn't what it used to be

      "Oddly, Musk prefers citizens to cutting labor costs, thereby, via supply and demand, ensuring better conditions for citizen workers."

      Nonsense. Musk said nothing of the sort, and in fact is happy to apply non-citizens if they can get hold of a Green Card - through any means necessary (his words).

      And he has already shown how much he cares for the American worker, i.e. he doesn't give a fork.

      "And THIS is what DoJ wants to make an example of?"

      Yes, and rightfully so, seeing that SpaceX seems to be in violation of U.S. law, although they aren't the only one.

      Also, considering that the U.S. space industry is hiring left, right and center, and can't find anywhere near enough suitably qualified U.S. citizens to fill all vacancies, what the DoJ does is very much in the interest of the USA. Unless you want to see another industry moving manufacturing abroad.

      The other alternative to this is that the USA will increasingly be left behind by other nations, not all of them friendly, who have less qualms about the citizenship status of the workers that support their critical industries.

      "How about actually enforcing the Hospital Price Transparency Rule? How about the price of cancer drugs rising by 10x due to middlemen cartel?"

      So you think the DoJ employes about three people which all deal with all issues in all industries?

      Drug prices could have long been lower had the U.S. government legislated price regulation. But since the average U.S. voter believes regulation is Socialism which is Communism, with many also subscribing to the Ayn Rand school of selfishness, Americans are taken for a ride by Big Pharma, the insurance companies and pretty much every other industry.

      Freedom, fork yeah!

      1. MachDiamond Silver badge

        Re: Asylum isn't what it used to be

        "Also, considering that the U.S. space industry is hiring left, right and center, and can't find anywhere near enough suitably qualified U.S. citizens to fill all vacancies,"

        Easily solved, get rid of HR departments and have supervisors and managers write their own job descriptions and process applications. HR could do a quick pass and root out applicants that don't have residency/citizen requirements, but they'd need to stop at that point and hand the rest of the files over. HR doesn't know what these jobs are and what qualifications are necessary. Why, as an EE, would I need to be good at PowerPoint or some CRM software/workflow that identified by some cryptic name and happens to be internally developed so unless I've worked there previously, I shouldn't know much about it? HR will kick out an application because the person doesn't know Catia (CAD program), but does know Solidworks (Catia's little brother). A department manager will also know that just being versed in any 3D CAD application might be good enough. Most of them are very similar. HR will have no clue. They will also not know that working on an F1 team in development is pretty much rocket science these days so that the person applying doesn't have "aerospace" references is not a factor and the department manager could be seriously chuffed to get somebody with that skill set. The trouble is that the applications never make it far enough to be considered. The job postings are mostly crap anyway and are just a random ChatGPT generated collection of business buzzwords put together in a way that will pass a grammar checker while conveying zero information at the same time.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Asylum isn't what it used to be

          > Catia (CAD program), but does know Solidworks ...

          Becoming decently proficient at Catia is not a simple task. It can take months of on-the-job experience.

          1. doublelayer Silver badge

            Re: Asylum isn't what it used to be

            That may be true (before I go farther, I know neither Catia nor Solidworks, nor any CAD really). However, that information could be passed through to the manager for them to rank applicants. Perhaps they got several applicants who all know Catia, in which case Solidworks guy is probably not going to get invited. If nobody with existing Catia experience is available, they might be more willing to try someone with less experience than they want, but more experience than not hiring anyone. HR doesn't know how easy or hard it is to pick up a skill, nor do they know what related skills convey valuable information. The person who wants the job filled should understand those things and can better parse the available candidates for them.

            1. Catkin

              Re: Asylum isn't what it used to be

              In my view, as a reasonably proficient hobbyist Solidworks user and someone who's prodded at Catia, it's like the difference between knowing how to drive and being able to fully service a car.

          2. MachDiamond Silver badge

            Re: Asylum isn't what it used to be

            "Becoming decently proficient at Catia is not a simple task. It can take months of on-the-job experience."

            I used that example as I started with Solidworks and had no issue picking up Catia and being useful in short order. I've also used other 3D CAD programs when helping other people out and it's not a big deal as the approach is almost the same with all of them. Only the icons have been changed to protect the innocent.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Asylum isn't what it used to be

              > it's not a big deal as the approach is almost the same with all of them.

              If you're talking about the 2D based workbench, used for constructing shapes prior to making them 3D then sure I could see that.

              But Solidworks is completely missing most of the specialist - as in, cannot do - entire areas of functionality which Catia has.

              Things like Natural Shape design (organic shapes), Ship structure design, HVAC system design, (etc). And those were present in Catia v5, which is ~25 years old now.

              The newer Catia v6, which subsequently because 3DEXPERIENCE has added a tonne more stuff over those decades.

              Solidworks has a 3rd party plugin to allow Organic shapes, and that's about it. Solidworks does cost a small fraction of the price of Catia / 3DEXPERIENCE though.

  6. MachDiamond Silver badge

    I hate to say it...

    Elon is correct. Aerospace companies are subject to ITAR laws when it comes to hiring and who can be given access to facilities. Even hiring somebody for a custodial position would be very difficult if they had to be excluded from various parts of the facility and had to leave the building during certain activities. Imagine being a supervisor and having to keep track of everybody's status and all of the details about where they can go and what they can be allowed to see. Nightmare. Even SpaceX offices that aren't handling hardware will still have sensitive information scattered about.

    I'm also not seeing that there would be lots of illegal immigrants with the skills and education to work in aerospace other than in positions they could get at any number of other companies if they are permitted to work in the first place.

    The people coming across the US borders informally are claiming asylum as it's an easy way to game the system. If they haven't been thrown out before, the US will have no way to verify any information they give before their being assigned a court date months in the future and let go to be on their way to whatever. Some will show up to present evidence but many don't and just disappear. I expect that it could be very easy and cheap to recruit people claiming asylum in the US to seek employment at someplace such as SpaceX and do a bit of info gathering. The process to get a green card or citizenship has been more involved in the past so those approved have been able to present verifiable information about themselves. If they can't, the best they might do is be given a visa that allows them to work in country for a period of time and the need to return to their home country every so often. If the US government can't verify a person, how would SpaceX be able to? If they can't, that puts them on the wrong side of Arms laws and subject to some pretty serious legal action. Far more than an employment violation which could be overlooked/dismissed as SpaceX is already going to be the long hold on getting back to the moon. Shutting down the company would break a lot of things.

    1. Ian Johnston Silver badge

      Re: I hate to say it...

      Elon is correct

      And the Department of Justice doesn't know the law as well as he and you do?

      1. MachDiamond Silver badge

        Re: I hate to say it...

        "And the Department of Justice doesn't know the law as well as he and you do?"

        Apparently not and we are likely seeing something being pushed by a politician and the action of a person within the DOJ rather than the DOJ as a whole. I feel very confident I am more intelligent than any one person in government service. A pallet of bricks has more value than many in government service so it's no too much braggadocio on my part to take this stance.

        1. Insert sadsack pun here Silver badge

          Re: I hate to say it...

          "it's no [sic] too much braggadocio on my part..."

          Apparently it was too much braggadocio on your part. Perhaps you would have got a less pretentious sentence correct.

  7. bertkaye

    It's only common sense

    All members of ISIS should be allowed to learn how to build rockets and bombs. Hire unknown immigrants for sensitive positions!

    -- Anonymous contributor. (Praise Allah. Infidels shall suffer.)

  8. CowHorseFrog

    Im truely shocked, Musk has never been anything but honourable and has never been sued for discriminaton or anything naughty..

  9. Claverhouse Silver badge


    First sighting of nonsensical new word !

  10. SlavickP

    Just checked few US DoJ jobs, all are restricted:

    “This job is open to

    The public

    U.S. Citizens, Nationals or those who owe allegiance to the U.S.

    Clarification from the agency


    1. Kevin McMurtrie Silver badge

      Many government jobs require US security clearance. It's something you need to build up over time.

      Musk was using ITAR as an excuse, which is definitely not in the same league. Things covered by ITAR are on Wikipedia. It's the assembly and application of the tech that's very difficult and restricted to share.

      1. MachDiamond Silver badge

        "Things covered by ITAR are on Wikipedia."

        I get the feeling that a judge isn't going to accept an argument based on what's on a Wikipedia page. I think all of us have run across some seriously wrong info there. I've run across plenty of technical information that isn't exactly wrong, but the author didn't do a good enough job "breaking it down Barney style" for it to not be too ambiguous.

        When something is a Federal law and subject to Federal punishments, it's good to err on the side of caution.

  11. zebm

    DOJ itself only hires citizens

    Perhaps green card holders, etc. should sue the DOJ?

    1. MachDiamond Silver badge

      Re: DOJ itself only hires citizens

      "Perhaps green card holders, etc. should sue the DOJ?"

      There's police departments in the US that are threatening to hire illegal aliens to fill positions. ...... hiring somebody that has openly broken Federal law to take a job enforcing the law. hmmmmmm

  12. Kristian Walsh Silver badge


    The entire US Space industry was created by refugees, many of whom were fleeing prosecution in their home country at the time...

    (That isn't a typo.)

    1. IGotOut Silver badge

      Re: Irony..

      I'd hardly call senior members of the SS / Nazi party refugees.

      War Criminals, yes.

      1. Kristian Walsh Silver badge

        Re: Irony..

        sigh... that one was too subtle for some, obviously. For avoidance of doubt, the word “refugees” is not to be taken literally in that sentence, as the description “fleeing prosecution” should have made clear.

        As I’m spelling stuff out: the irony is in comparing the situation where today’s US space industry are (allegedly) assuming that refugees applying for jobs are no more trustworthy than criminals, when that very industry was founded by genuine criminals who were spirited out of Germany before the process of identifying and trying prominent Nazi’s got going, and who were explained away to the public as mere “refugees” from post-war Germany.

    2. blackcat Silver badge

      Re: Irony..

      To quote Full Metal Jacket:

      "If we move them they are evacuees, if they come to us they are refugees"

      Mr Von Braun was not a refugee. And the very people who took him were the people running the prosecutions.

    3. Ian Johnston Silver badge

      Re: Irony..

      Actually, most of them had been creating persecution in their own countries. But hey, what was 20,000 dead slaves in the Mittelwerk between post-war friends?

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward


    The US has always been hung up over aliens.

    No wonder the whole UFO industry was created there.

  14. Cliffwilliams44 Bronze badge

    ITAR is a mine field

    If you now anything about ITAR at all you know it is a regulatory mine field. If you think you are good on one clause you may run afoul of another. The best thing you can do is to restrict your activity to the most compliant!

    I don't blame Musk and SpaceX for their stance. If the government wants to grant them amnesty from any possible penalties from a possible OTAR violation then many they will reconsider their hiring practices.

    1. YetAnotherXyzzy

      Re: ITAR is a mine field

      Yes. This.

      My previous employer was pivoting into a USG space contractor and subject to ITAR. They set up a wholly owned subsidiary that would do that work and would be compliant, and employees like me (U.S. citizen living outside the U.S., as well as non-US citizens) would simply not be transferred into the subsidiary nor see that work. Nope, said Uncle Sam, that's not good enough, and so we were all made redundant. Never mind that, irony of ironies, one of the things that originally got me that job was that I had previously held a TS security clearance.

      So Uncle Sam yelling at a space contractor for not hiring the kind of people that Uncle Sam made my previous space contractor employer fire is a bit rich.

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    This lawsuit looks like it was brought by a recent "Affirmative Action" political appointee

    For those who do know how the US system works large number of senior and mid level DOJ positions are political appointees. Handed out to people that belong to certain party political factions, favored by powerful politicians, or big party donors. None of these appointments are made on merit or even basic competence. Any actual professional competence is purely accidental.

    The person at the DOJ who brought this lawsuit is a classic "Quota Hire" (those who live in the US will have dealt with these people). No matter what "credentials" they might have they usually are incompetent to a truly staggering degree. I have dealt with people with Ivy League law degrees etc and very senior positions who could not fight a parking ticket let alone deal with any complex legal issues. Saying that not all were Quota People. Ivy Leaguers tend to be both arrogant and not terribly competent anyway. The DOJ person in this case has never had a real job in her life. She has been deeply embedded in the pollical party / government bureaucracy one way or another since graduation.

    As everyone and I mean everyone who has any kind of real world job in the US knows about the Citizenship requirement for so many government / military jobs normally one would assume that the lawsuit was a straight up politically motivated hit job. Plenty of those. But in this case its 50/50 that the senior DOJ person who signed off on the lawsuit is just really stupid and has no actual idea what the law is. Seen plenty of those over the years.

    The usual rule with lawyers in the US is - the moment you see only "Human Rights" law or Administrative law in a lawyers resume you know you are dealing with some third rate lawyer who is totally useless outside of playing the sue the government / sue private companies for "infractions" games. The worst sort of lawyers. If you can imagine such a thing. The sort of lawyer that even a cockroach could look down on.

  16. Robert Grant

    Meanwhile, from NASA

    > Other than extremely rare exceptions, you must be a U.S. citizen in order to work for NASA as a civil service employee.


    1. graeme leggett Silver badge

      Re: Meanwhile, from NASA

      NASA is a federal agency and SpaceX isn't

  17. conel

    Strange on so many levels.

    As per the article, Musk has publicly state this position for over a decade (I remember a friend being very disappointed when I told him).

    If the government believe he's mistaken why not write him a letter first (and the rest of the rocket industry too, because most seem to be under the same impression as Musk).

    The not needing advanced degree thing is nonsense. Welders work to drawings, drawings are classified. Even cleaners need security clearance.

    1. graeme leggett Silver badge

      Re: Strange on so many levels.

      They wrote to SpaceX in June 2020.

      And then in August 2020.

      And when SpaceX wasn't helpful the DOJ eventually through court action got the records from SpaceX in June 2021.

  18. Darrenking

    Because of course 'refugees' and 'asylum seekers' aren't economic migrants after our jobs, they are fleeing persecution.

  19. StudeJeff

    I trust Musk more the the Department of "Justice"

    I work for a big defense contractor, you can't even get in our building without being a US citizen.

    Musk says you can't work for SpaceX unless you are a US citizen or have a green card. That sounds eminently reasonable. In fact, with that's been the law for years. Ages ago when I was hiring people one of the requirements is verifying they could work here legally, and that was by checking their Social Security or green card. If they didn't have one or the other I couldn't hire them.

    And THIS DOJ isn't an objective enforcer of the law, it's a political organization that is rotting from the top down.

  20. lukewarmdog

    So that trump, sure is a bad person, right?

    All of you arguing musk isn't wrong and that the DoJ is 'politicised' sure have made me laugh!

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like