Elon Musk just can’t seem to escape the consequences of aligning himself with Donald J. Trump.
According to Politico legal reporter Kyle Cheney, the New York Times has won its lawsuit, in which they requested a full list of all the security clearances the Tesla CEO maintained within the United States federal government.
Musk, of course, personally worked for President Trump as a special government employee during the first few months of his presidency, though their relationship quickly turned sour and seemed to end with a bang when Musk publicly accused Donald Trump of being on the infamous Epstein list. But even outside of his DOGE nonsense, Musk’s companies continue to maintain a variety of government contracts.
Recently, the New York Times requested “a single, two-page document listing any security clearances granted to Elon Musk.”
The judge assigned to the case wrote that the U.S. Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) had pushed back against the request, claiming that such a document would “invade Musk’s privacy.”
Both parties in the suit requested a quick judgment from U.S. District Court Judge Denise Cote, and that’s exactly what was ultimately granted — in the Times’ favor.
In a statement of facts on the matter, the court wrote, “Elon Musk — whose security clearances, if any, are the subject of the plaintiffs’ FOIA request — is the founder of several companies, including SpaceX and Starlink. The federal government has awarded numerous contracts to SpaceX over the past decade, which make it one of the largest federal contractors. It is not disputed that SpaceX handles sensitive government information. It is also not disputed that Starlink, a subsidiary of SpaceX, also contracts with the federal government and provides satellite-based internet services relied upon by the military.”
Judge Cote went on to also note that “during his time as a major government contractor and as a special government employee, Musk has publicly discussed his security clearance.”
The court’s ruling further explains that Musk’s own social media posts and public town hall statements went a long way to bite him in the behind in the end.
“DCSA has not met its burden to prove that Musk’s privacy interest outweighs the significant public interests in disclosure,” Judge Cote wrote on the matter. “Even applying Exemption 7(C)’s more privacy-protective standard, DCSA has failed to establish that disclosure of the requested document ‘reasonably can be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of [Musk’s] personal privacy,’ 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(C), given Musk’s own public statements, the narrow scope of plaintiffs’ FOIA request, and the substantial public interests at stake. Moreover, to the extent any detail in the document invades Musk’s personal privacy beyond the issues discussed here, the defendant may propose redactions for the Court’s ex parte, in camera review.”
You can find the full ruling on the New York Times lawsuit here.
Featured image via Flickr/Daniel Oberhaus