Elon Musk is often referred to as his own law school curriculum by Stanford Professors Evelyn Douek and Alex Stamos on the tech policy podcast Moderated Content. He covers a wide range of legal topics from contracts to torts to the First Amendment to SLAPP suits, making him a one-man 1L textbook on wheels.
Today’s lesson from Elon falls under CivPro and is titled “Why Do My PACER Alerts — Okay, Fine, Court Listener — Look Like That?”
The recent controversy stems from Musk’s sensitivity, as five SpaceX employees sent an open letter via the company’s internal Microsoft Teams channel criticizing Musk for his behavior and lack of support for diversity and inclusion. After being fired by SpaceX, the employees filed a complaint with the NLRB, alleging interference with their right to organize. The NLRB investigated and scheduled a hearing in California where SpaceX is headquartered.
SpaceX retaliated by suing the NLRB in Texas, arguing that ALJs are illegal based on a previous Fifth Circuit ruling. A judge in Texas later transferred the case back to California, but SpaceX petitioned the Fifth Circuit to intervene. The Fifth Circuit temporarily stayed the transfer, leading to confusion over the case’s jurisdiction.
The NLRB responded to SpaceX’s claims, arguing that the case should rightfully be heard in California, where the events took place. Despite the persuasive argument, the case remained in the Fifth Circuit, creating uncertainty over its final location.
As the legal proceedings continue, the case remains a point of contention between SpaceX and the NLRB, with jurisdiction and venue issues at the forefront.
For more information on the case, you can visit the respective court dockets: In re: Space Exploration Technologies [Fifth Circuit Mandamus Docket, via Court Listener], Space X v. NLRB [Central Dist. CA Docket, via Court Listener], Space X v. NLRB [Southern Dist. TX Docket, via Court Listener]
Liz Dye lives in Baltimore where she produces the Law and Chaos substack and podcast.