J.D. Vance Letter To Garland

August 31, 2023
The Honorable Merrick Garland

Attorney General of the United States
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20530
Dear Attorney General Garland,
I was surprised to learn that the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) is suing SpaceX for favoring
American citizens in hiring. The DOJ’s complaint states that a lawsuit was brought because
“SpaceX . . . rejected [job] applicants who identified as asylees or refugees because it believed
that they were ineligible to be hired” under federal regulations, specifically the International
Traffic in Arms Regulations (“ITAR”).1 The complaint further alleges that, after learning that the
DOJ does not share SpaceX’s interpretation of the ITAR, SpaceX changed its hiring practices
and hired at least one asylee.2
Thus, putting aside the legal merits of the DOJ’s case—which are themselves questionable3—
there does not appear to be a moral or political case for choosing to proceed with a lawsuit under
these circumstances. The DOJ admits that any preference SpaceX gave to U.S. citizens and
lawful permanent residents was intended only to satisfy what SpaceX perceived to be its legal
obligations. If that belief was informed by advice of counsel, as it likely was, what value does the
DOJ perceive in further extracting a pound of flesh from a company that was seeking in good
faith to balance competing legal duties?
The case for restraint is further supported by the fact that the DOJ will be understood to impose
upon SpaceX a standard that the DOJ and other government agencies do not adhere to
themselves. For example, an active DOJ job posting for a “recreation specialist” in the Bureau of
Prisons requires proof of U.S. citizenship, even though the job’s duties are a far cry from any
1
United States v. Space Exploration Techs. Corp., No. ____, Exec. Office for Immigration Review, Complaint
(Aug. 23, 2023), ¶ 45, available at https://www.justice.gov/media/1311656/dl?inline.
2
Id. ¶ 53.
3
For example, the DOJ’s lawsuit hinges on 8 U.S.C. § 1324b(a), which contains a general prohibition on
discriminating against asylees and refugees “because of [their] citizenship status.” Id. But 8 U.S.C. § 1324b(a)(4)
provides that, “[n]otwithstanding any other provision of this section, it is not an unfair immigration-related
employment practice . . . 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.” Id. The DOJ argues that
8 U.S.C. § 1324b(a)(4) is inapplicable in SpaceX’s case, because SpaceX rejected asylees and refugees out of hand,
without evaluating their qualifications. But that argument has not yet been tested, legally or factually, and DOJ fails
to cite any federal court precedent in support of its position.
national security function and instead include “planning, developing, and implementing special
recreation programs [for federal prisoners], i.e., yoga, varsity softball, [and] aerobics.”4 A simple
internet search reveals a host of other federal government and contractor jobs that require
applicants to prove American citizenship, as they should. It makes sense that the men and
women tasked with maintaining federal databases or managing our satellites should be citizens
or permanent residents with some stake in the future of our nation. It also makes sense that
companies responsible for developing and maintaining new technologies with clear military
applications should be citizens or permanent residents invested in the fortunes of the United
States. The DOJ should not discourage hiring practices that can shield sensitive intellectual
property from theft by foreign actors.
It is difficult to separate this new DOJ investigation of SpaceX from the Biden administration’s
other interactions with Mr. Musk. In one instance, when asked about Mr. Musk’s acquisition of
Twitter, President Biden suggested that Mr. Musk’s relationships with other countries should be
investigated. In another instance, President Biden described Twitter under Mr. Musk as “an outfit
that spews lies all across the world.” DOJ’s lawsuit alleges that SpaceX specifically declined to
hire refugees and asylees from at least September 2018 to May 2022. As you know, Mr. Musk
began his acquisition of Twitter in April 2022, stating that he wanted to turn the website into a
“digital public square.” He has since reinstated many previously banned conservative political
commentators and President Donald Trump.
Justice must be dispensed in an impartial manner, without political animus, if Americans are to
have faith in our system. Unfortunately, the timing of DOJ’s investigation into SpaceX could be
interpreted as being connected to the Twitter acquisition. There were many intermediate steps
that DOJ could have taken to inform SpaceX about current federal hiring rules and answer Mr.
Musk’s ITAR concerns before initiating a lawsuit. This, coupled with the fact that many federal
aerospace jobs include explicit citizenship requirements, suggests that SpaceX could have been
investigated by DOJ because of Mr. Musk’s management of Twitter, not because SpaceX’s
hiring practices are uniquely odious.
In the interest of addressing these concerns, I ask that the DOJ provide responses to the
following questions by Friday, September 29:
• Has the DOJ investigated other private aerospace companies or government contractors
for hiring practices similar to those of SpaceX?
• Does the DOJ believe that favoring American citizens for jobs constitutes discrimination
against noncitizens?
• Did the DOJ ever have a meeting with SpaceX to inform the company that it may be out
of compliance with federal hiring laws and to encourage SpaceX to change its practices?
• Was the DOJ investigation that precipitated this new discrimination lawsuit initiated in
response to Mr. Musk’s acquisition of Twitter?
4
https://www.usajobs.gov/job/744062600?utm_campaign=google_jobs_apply&utm_source=google_jobs_apply&ut
m_medium=organic
Sincerely,
JD Vance
US Senator

J.D. Vance Letter To Garland

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

J.D. Vance Letter To Garland

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

J.D. Vance Letter To Garland

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

August 31, 2023

The Honorable Merrick Garland

Dear Attorney General Garland,

You might also like