Elon Musk’s SpaceX Sues California Coastal Commission Over Its Alleged Political Bias
Meanwhile, California Gov. Gavin Newsom sides with Musk over panel and says SpaceX launches should be allowed to continue.
Legal Insurrection readers may recall that when I covered the national celebration over the SpaceX booster catch, I noted that the California Coastal Commission denied launch permits to the company because commission members are unhappy with CEO Elon Musk’s comments on “X.”
Musk was angered at this direct attack on his free speech rights, and threatened to sue. His threats have now become the California Coast Commission’s reality.
Elon Musk’s SpaceX is suing a California agency that rejected his company’s plan to increase rocket launches from an Air Force base in Santa Barbara County, arguing that commissioners engaged in political bias while making the decision.
Attorneys from Los Angeles-based law firm Venable LLP filed the complaint against the California Coastal Commission in Los Angeles federal court on Tuesday, days after Musk threatened in a weekend post on X to take legal action against the agency.
The lawsuit argues that the agency’s 12-member commission “engaged in naked political discrimination” during last week’s debate on a Department of Defense proposal to expand the number of SpaceX rocket launches at Vandenberg Space Force Base from 36 to 50.
“Rarely has a government agency made so clear that it was exceeding its authorized mandate to punish a company for the political views and statements of its largest shareholder and CEO,” the suit says.
You can read the Complaint here.
The commission has declined to comment. However, I believe it’s going to be hard for the panel to defend its actions in court.
One commissioner on the 12-member coastal panel recently accused Musk, who has increasingly asserted his voice in the U.S. presidential race, of “spewing and tweeting political falsehoods.”
…The commission voted 6 to 4 to block the requested additional SpaceX launches. Some commission members expressed concern about Musk as a business leader and how much SpaceX activity at the site was commercial rather than government activity.
Musk’s lawsuit called any consideration of his public statements improper, violating speech rights protected by the U.S. Constitution.It also accused the commission of “unconstitutional overreach,” intruding on national security and other federal interests, and said launches at the base have had “no significant effects on coastal resources.”
“Rarely has a government agency made so clear that it was exceeding its authorized mandate to punish a company for the political views and statements of its largest shareholder and CEO,” it said.
However, in an intriguing development, California Gov. Gavin Newsom is backing Musk in this dispute.
I’m with Elon,” Newsom, a Democrat, said in an interview late Thursday, after campaigning for Vice President Kamala Harris in the battleground state of North Carolina. “I didn’t like that.”
…“Look, I’m not helping the legal case,” Newsom acknowledged. He added, “You can’t bring up that explicit level of politics.”
Newsom indicated he broadly agreed with the lawsuit and that the independent agency should have confined its debate to the merits of the permit rather than engage in a discussion of Musk’s political activities.
“These are friends of mine that said that,” said Newsom, who appoints some of the members. “These are good commissioners. But you got to call balls and strikes. And trust me, I’m not big on the Elon Musk bandwagon right now. So that’s me calling balls and strikes.”
Why is Newsom taking this stance?
Is he tired of losing business to Texas?
Can he foresee the results of the presidential election being more favorable to those who support Musk and his work?
It will be interesting to see if the commission revisits their vote in light of these developments….especially given the enormous pride SpaceX has allowed the American people to experience in its home-grown technology in recent weeks.
‘I’m with Elon’: Newsom sides with Musk over Calif. agency on SpaceX launches https://t.co/WbBP6xtmSe
— E&E News (@EENewsUpdates) October 18, 2024
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
I expect to see either the CCC fold or a quick judgment on the pleadings.
As pointed out in the complaint, the statute creating the CCC and establishing what it has jurisdiction over explicitly excludes federal lands. So before even getting to the federal supremacy or first amendment issues, court will probably just say the under California law, CCC has no jurisdiction over what happens on federal lands.
That was my question, as I am not an attorney. How does a state-level puke agency have authority over a federal defense base? Especially one that has such a corrupt history, including acting like mafiosi like CCC? Their record of extortion, bribery, and outright filth should qualify them all for federal RICO convictions.
Didn’t he appoint some of these political hacks?
Why, yes, yes he did:
“The California Coastal Commission has 12 voting members and 3 non-voting members. Six of the voting members are “public members,” and six are local elected officials who come from specific coastal districts. All voting members are appointed either by the Governor, Senate Rules Committee, or the Speaker of the Assembly; each appoints four commissioners, two public members and two elected officials. Each Commissioner may appoint an alternate to serve in his or her absence. The Secretaries of the Natural Resources Agency and the State Transportation Agency and the Chair of the State Lands Commission serve as non-voting members and may appoint a designee to serve in their place.”
from: https://www.coastal.ca.gov/roster.html
Newsolini is so contemptibly feckless. This twit goes whichever way the winds are blowing. SpaceX is bringing jobs and positive publicity/cachet to California, so, he announces his support for Musk against this commission.
The panel is women telling men what to do, an extension of DEI.
Imagine if the government routinely denied you a drivers license, homestead exemptions or an operation because you have the wrong opinions. Social Credit system is at the door ringing the bell.
Newsom isn’t ‘supporting’ Musk.
He’s saying that they should have buried the lede and made sure to give themselves enough plausible deniability to claim it wasn’t political.
Anyone who takes on the CCC is a hero. I remember the ballot proposition that created it, I think it was c. 1972. My father (an architect, so he had experience dealing with planning bureaucracy) predicted almost exactly what it has become. Later on he had to get a CCC permit to add another bedroom to our house, and we weren’t anywhere near the beach or on a bay, nor did we have a view. Just your basic 10,000 sf lot in a subdivision. Yet somehow the hoi palloi still have their Malibu beach houses, and normal people can’t afford anything within 10 miles of the coast.
Gov Hair Gel could care less about Musk. If he did he would have said something when Musk moved Tesla out of California. What Hair Gel cares about is 2028.
If people wonder what a social credit system run by socialists looks like, this is it. Turning down a project because of political beliefs and stopping millions of gallons of fresh water because they don’t like it. A few appointed people wielding dictatorial power over the masses.