Rocket maker SpaceX has filed a second lawsuit in Texas challenging the U.S. National Labor Relations Board's structure after a federal appeals court refused to stop a nearly identical case filed by the company elsewhere in the Lone Star state from being sent to California.
The complaint filed in Waco, Texas, federal court late Friday, like the lawsuit SpaceX brought in Brownsville, Texas, in January, claims that limits on the removal of NLRB administrative judges and the board's five presidentially-appointed members violate the U.S. Constitution.
The unusual move by SpaceX came two days after the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers Texas, declined to reconsider a panel's ruling rejecting the company's bid to block the transfer of the original case at the NLRB's request from Brownsville to Los Angeles.
SpaceX has argued that its case belongs in Texas because the company operates a launch facility in the state and a pending NLRB case accusing SpaceX of illegally firing a group of engineers could impact the company's employment policies nationwide.
While the new case had yet to be assigned a judge as of Monday morning, under a standing order, all non-patent lawsuits filed in Waco are assigned to U.S. District Judge Alan Albright, an appointee of Republican former President Donald Trump.
An NLRB spokeswoman declined to comment on the new complaint. The board in court filings has said SpaceX's constitutional claims lack merit and that the case belongs in California, where SpaceX is based and where the underlying administrative case is being heard.
Amazon.com, Starbucks and Trader Joe's have raised similar challenges to the NLRB's structure in pending board cases.
SpaceX initially sued the labor board one day after the NLRB general counsel issued a complaint alleging the company had fired eight engineers for circulating a letter criticizing CEO Elon Musk. SpaceX denies the allegations.
At the NLRB's urging, U.S. District Judge Rolando Olvera in February transferred SpaceX's lawsuit to Los Angeles, saying "the most substantial part of the events" giving rise to the lawsuit happened in California.
Circuit Judge Edith Jones in a dissenting opinion joined by five other appointees of Republican presidents said SpaceX was allowed to sue in "what it perceived as a statutorily permissible venue for its challenge to the constitutional setup of NLRB adjudication procedures."
Jones said SpaceX did nothing wrong, unlike the NLRB's attorneys, who she contended "engaged in shabby tactics to accomplish their own forum shopping" in advocating for the transfer of the case to California.
The cases are Space Exploration Technologies Corp v. NLRB, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, No. 1:24-cv-00001, and U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, No. 6:24-cv-203.
For SpaceX: Catherine Eschbach and Harry Johnson of Morgan Lewis & Bockius; David Oliveira of Roerig, Oliveira & Fisher, LLP
For the NLRB: David Boehm of the NLRB; Benjamin Lyles of the U.S. Department of Justice
Read more:
SpaceX loses latest bid to keep lawsuit against NLRB in Texas
NLRB defends 'zealous advocacy' of SpaceX case transfer
SpaceX faces hearing on engineers fired after criticizing Elon Musk over sexism
SpaceX loses bid to keep challenge to NLRB structure in Texas court
SpaceX sues US agency that accused it of firing workers critical of Elon Musk
SpaceX illegally fired workers critical of Elon Musk, US labor agency says
SpaceX, NLRB duel over proper venue for attack on agency's structure
Amazon joins companies arguing US labor board is unconstitutional
US court tries to bring SpaceX lawsuit against US labor board back to Texas
