Stock Markets February 9, 2026

U.S. Labor Board Drops Long-Running Case Against SpaceX, Citing Jurisdiction Shift

NLRB dismisses complaint over alleged firings of eight engineers after National Mediation Board opinion places SpaceX under different oversight

By Priya Menon
U.S. Labor Board Drops Long-Running Case Against SpaceX, Citing Jurisdiction Shift

The National Labor Relations Board has moved to dismiss its two-year-old complaint alleging SpaceX fired eight engineers over an open letter criticizing Elon Musk, citing a separate agency's view that the engineers fall under National Mediation Board jurisdiction. The decision signals the NLRB will avoid future enforcement actions against SpaceX while legal and jurisdictional questions about the agency's authority remain unresolved.

Key Points

  • The NLRB dismissed a two-year-old charge accusing SpaceX of firing eight engineers who signed an open letter critical of Elon Musk, citing lack of jurisdiction.
  • An opinion from the National Mediation Board led the NLRB to conclude the engineers fall under NMB jurisdiction rather than the NLRB's.
  • An earlier appeals court decision found the NLRB's structure likely unlawful and blocked the agency from pursuing cases against SpaceX and two other companies, contributing to enforcement uncertainty.

Feb 9 - The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is stepping back from a prolonged legal confrontation with SpaceX, concluding it will discontinue the agency's long-running case against the aerospace company and avoid bringing further matters involving the firm, according to a letter from the NLRB to the attorneys representing the former employees.

The complaint at the center of the dispute, filed two years earlier, alleged that SpaceX dismissed eight engineers in retaliation for their participation in an open letter that criticized the company's chief executive. In the recent correspondence, a regional NLRB official pointed to an opinion issued by the National Mediation Board (NMB) as the basis for the decision to withdraw the charge.

That NMB opinion concluded that the engineers in question fell within the NMB's jurisdiction rather than that of the NLRB. Quoting a line from the agency letter, Danielle Pierce, identified as a regional director at the NLRB, wrote that "accordingly, the National Labor Relations Board lacks jurisdiction over the Employer and, therefore, I am dismissing your charge."

The NLRB's move follows a separate legal development last August when a U.S. appeals court found merit in arguments from SpaceX and two other companies that the structure of the NLRB is likely unlawful, and the court blocked the agency from pursuing cases against those employers. That decision has contributed to ongoing uncertainty over the NLRB's ability to enforce labor law in certain contexts.

Jurisdictional authority between the two agencies differs in practical effect. The NMB is responsible for labor matters covering railroad and airline employees, including workers at carriers such as American Airlines Group. The NLRB typically oversees most other private-sector employers - a category that includes many manufacturers and industrial companies, for example Boeing.

Federal law affords workers covered by the NLRB a broad right to engage in collective action aimed at improving working conditions, whether or not they are unionized. By contrast, workers who fall under NMB jurisdiction are subject to a different statutory framework that does not provide identical protections.

SpaceX, the NLRB and the NMB did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The NLRB's decision to dismiss the charge and to avoid pursuing further cases involving SpaceX leaves unresolved questions about which agency will hold responsibility for employment disputes at the company and how employee protections will be applied in practice.


Summary

The NLRB dismissed a two-year-old complaint accusing SpaceX of firing eight engineers for signing an open letter critical of Elon Musk, citing an NMB opinion that placed those engineers under NMB jurisdiction. A prior appeals court decision raised questions about the NLRB's structure and its authority to pursue cases against SpaceX and similar employers.

Key points

  • The NLRB has withdrawn a complaint against SpaceX and signaled it will not bring future cases involving the company while jurisdictional issues persist.
  • An NMB opinion informed the NLRB's conclusion that it lacks jurisdiction over the affected SpaceX engineers.
  • Legal challenges to the NLRB's structure - including a recent appeals court ruling - have limited the agency's ability to pursue enforcement against SpaceX and other employers.

Risks and uncertainties

  • Unclear jurisdictional boundaries between the NLRB and NMB create uncertainty for aerospace and industrial employers about which labor protections apply - impacting labor relations in the aerospace and airline sectors.
  • Pending legal questions regarding the NLRB's structure could restrict the agency's future enforcement actions, leaving employees and employers without clear recourse under traditional NLRB protections - affecting manufacturing and private-sector labor dynamics.
  • The dismissal leaves unresolved how employee complaints at SpaceX will be handled going forward, introducing potential legal and operational uncertainty for the company and its supply chain partners.

Risks

  • Jurisdictional ambiguity between the NLRB and NMB could leave aerospace and airline workers with different or diminished labor protections.
  • Legal challenges to the NLRB's structure may limit the agency's enforcement capability, affecting labor relations across manufacturing and private-sector employers.
  • The NLRB's dismissal leaves unresolved how employment disputes at SpaceX will be handled, creating potential operational and legal uncertainty for SpaceX and its contractors.

More from Stock Markets

Moscow Stocks Finish Mixed as MOEX Index Holds Steady Feb 22, 2026 Rolls-Royce Poised to Announce Up to £1.5 Billion Share Buyback Alongside Annual Results Feb 22, 2026 DAE Capital Nears Purchase of Macquarie AirFinance, Sources Say Feb 22, 2026 S&P 500 Shows Signs of Tightening Range; Strategist Sees Potential for a Big Move Feb 22, 2026 Supreme Court to Clarify Reach of Helms-Burton Act in Multi-Billion Dollar Cuba Claims Feb 22, 2026