White House reviews SpaceX contracts as Trump-Musk feud simmers, sources say
(Removes duplicate dateline.)
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The White House earlier this month directed the Defense Department and NASA to gather details on billions of dollars in SpaceX contracts following the public blowout between President Donald Trump and billionaire Elon Musk, four people familiar with the order told Reuters.
Sparking an ongoing review, the administration ordered the agencies to scrutinize Musk's contracts to ready possible retaliation against the businessman and his companies, these people said. As Reuters reported on Thursday, Pentagon officials are simultaneously considering whether to reduce the role that SpaceX, Musk's space and satellite company, may win in an ambitious new U.S. missile defense system.
Reuters couldn't determine whether the White House intends to cancel any of the approximately $22 billion in federal contracts SpaceX now has. But the review shows the administration is following through on a threat by Trump during his spat with Musk last week to possibly terminate business and subsidies for Musk ventures. 'We'll take a look at everything,' the president said, speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One on June 6.
In an email to Reuters, a White House spokesperson didn't answer questions about Musk's business, saying the 'Trump administration is committed to a rigorous review process for all bids and contracts.' In a separate statement, a spokesperson at NASA said the agency 'will continue to work with our industry partners to ensure the president's objectives in space are met.'
Neither SpaceX nor officials at the Defense Department responded to requests for comment.
The people familiar with the order said the contract scrutiny is intended to give the administration the ability to move fast if Trump decides to act against Musk, who until recently was a senior advisor to the president and the head of the cost-cutting Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE. The review is 'for political ammunition,' one of the people said.
Whether the U.S. government could legally, or practically, cancel existing contracts is unclear. But the possibility underscores concerns among governance experts that politics and personal pique could improperly influence matters affecting government coffers, national security and the public interest.
'There's an irony here that Musk's contracts could be under the same type of subjective political scrutiny that he and his DOGE team have put on thousands of other contracts,' said Scott Amey, a contracting expert and general counsel at the Project on Government Oversight, a watchdog group based in Washington. 'Any decision shouldn't be based on the egos of two men but on the best interests of the public and national security.'
Musk's SpaceX in recent years has become a crucial partner of the U.S. government in much of its aerospace and defense work – launching satellites and other space cargo and potentially managing a crucial element of the 'Golden Dome' missile shield planned by Trump.
Although Musk in recent days has sought to walk back some of his critiques of the president – such as calling for Trump's impeachment last week and linking him to a convicted sex offender – his outbursts nonetheless highlighted the government's reliance on SpaceX.
Before reversing course, Musk threatened to decommission the company's Dragon spacecraft. The spacecraft, as part of a roughly $5 billion contract with NASA, is the only U.S. vessel currently capable of carrying astronauts to and from the International Space Station.
SpaceX is also building a network of hundreds of spy satellites under a classified contract with the National Reconnaissance Office, a U.S. intelligence agency. The contract was a pivotal transaction for SpaceX, deepening its ties with U.S. defense and intelligence services.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
35 minutes ago
- The Hill
Israel issues warning to Iran amid tit-for-tat strikes: ‘Tehran will burn'
Israel issued a stark warning to Iran on Saturday as the two Middle Eastern nations continued to exchange fire: Stop the strikes or 'Tehran will burn.' 'If [Iranian Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali] Khamenei continue to fire missiles at the Israeli home front, Tehran will burn,' Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz wrote on social platform X following a closed-door meeting, according to a translation. 'The Iranian dictator is making the residents of Tehran hostage to his criminal policies for the survival of his regime,' he added. His comments come after Iran launched retaliatory drone and air strikes toward Israel Friday in response to the Israeli military's surprise attack a day earlier — which targeted Tehran's nuclear facilities and ballistic missile sites. In the initial strike, several prominent officials were killed, including a close adviser of Khamenei, two top Iranian nuclear scientists, the commander and deputy commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and the deputy commander in chief of Iran's armed forces. In tit-for-tat exchange continued into Saturday. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his military have vowed to cripple nuclear facilities under its Operation Rising Lion mission. Strikes overnight on Tehran killed about nine senior scientists tied to warfare developments in the Islamic republic, according to Israeli officials. '9 senior scientists and experts responsible for advancing the Iranian regime's nuclear weapons program. All of the eliminated scientists and experts, eliminated based on intelligence, were key factors in the development of Iranian nuclear weapons,' The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) wrote in a post online. 'Their elimination is a significant blow to the regime's ability to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Two other senior defense and intelligence officials were pronounced dead by the Iranian regime on Saturday, NBC News reported. Civilians have not been shielded from violence, either, as 320 people were wounded in the round of attacks on Iran and 78 more killed due to continued air strikes, per the AP. The IDF said it would continue to target East Azerbaijan and the Iranian cities of Kermanshah and Lorestan as Iran's counterattacks in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv persist. Explosions and sirens were blaring across the Jewish State overnight. Two rockets were also launched from Gaza toward Israel, although there were no corresponding injuries, officials said. Turbulence in the region has also put a damper on nuclear talks between Washington and Tehran. President Trump has sought to create a new agreement with Iran that would include dismantling its nuclear capabilities. On Friday, Trump responded to Israel's surprise strike by urging the Iranian regime to come back to the negotiating table and make a deal. 'There has already been great death and destruction, but there is still time to make this slaughter, with the next already planned attacks being even more brutal, come to an end,' the president posted to Truth Social. 'Iran must make a deal, before there is nothing left, and save what was once known as the Iranian Empire,' he added. 'No more death, no more destruction, JUST DO IT, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE.' Trump also suggested in a separate post that the moment was a 'second chance.' Despite the pressure, Iran signaled that it could pull out of the upcoming nuclear talks, which are scheduled for Sunday in Oman. The administration said earlier Friday that they were not involved in Israel's attack on Iran. Later in the day, however, the U.S. did begin to military shift assets and assist with shooting down incoming ballistic missiles. Tehran has also warned that it will strike ships in the Red Sea if Britain, France or the U.S. engage in warfare. U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee (R), who remains in Israel, reflected on the overnight sirens that signaled air raids as several voices among Trump's allies have urged Trump to make a move on Iran. 'Been rough nite in Israel. Had to head to shelter 5 times during the nite. It's now Shabbat here. Should be quiet. Probably won't be,' Huckabee wrote Saturday on X. 'Entire nation under orders to stay near shelter.' In another post, the former Arkansas governor issued a reminder to those who want the U.S. to stay out of the conflict. 'If you hear 'Israel is no concern to USA' remember 700,000 AMERICANS live in Israel. That is equivalent to a full House District,' he continued 'More Americans here than in any other country except Mexico! ' 'Iran isn't just attacking Israel but your fellow Americans who live here,' he added.
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Nippon Steel needs ‘management freedom' for U.S. Steel deal, Nikkei reports
Nippon Steel's (NPSCY) planned takeover of U.S. Steel (X) may not proceed if the Japanese company has insufficient freedom of management, Nikkei Asia's Naoki Matsuda reports, citing comments made by a Nippon Steel executive. U.S. President Trump on Thursday said that the U.S. will have a 'golden share' in U.S. Steel and that he would exercise 'total control' over the fate of the steelmaker. Easily unpack a company's performance with TipRanks' new KPI Data for smart investment decisions Receive undervalued, market resilient stocks right to your inbox with TipRanks' Smart Value Newsletter Published first on TheFly – the ultimate source for real-time, market-moving breaking financial news. Try Now>> See Insiders' Hot Stocks on TipRanks >> Read More on X: Disclaimer & DisclosureReport an Issue Mixed options sentiment in US Steel with shareslittle changed Trump Trade: U.S. President says China getting 10% tariffs in 'done' deal Elon Musk's X Threatens Advertisers With Lawsuits to Win Back Ad Dollars U.S., Mexico near deal to remove 50% steel tariffs, Bloomberg reports Option traders moderately bearish in US Steel with shares down 0.3% Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Hamilton Spectator
36 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
What's left for the Supreme Court to decide? 21 cases, including state bans on transgender care
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is in the homestretch of a term that has lately been dominated by the Trump administration's emergency appeals of lower court orders seeking to slow President Donald Trump's efforts to remake the federal government. But the justices also have 21 cases to resolve that were argued between December and mid-May, including a push by Republican-led states to ban gender-affirming care for transgender minors. One of the argued cases was an emergency appeal, the administration's bid to be allowed to enforce Trump's executive order denying birthright citizenship to U.S.-born children of parents who are in the country illegally. The court typically aims to finish its work by the end of June. Here are some of the biggest remaining cases: Tennessee and 26 other states have enacted bans on certain treatment for transgender youth The oldest unresolved case, and arguably the term's biggest, stems from a challenge to Tennessee's law from transgender minors and their parents who argue that it is unconstitutional sex discrimination aimed at a vulnerable population. At arguments in December, the court's conservative majority seemed inclined to uphold the law, voicing skepticism of claims that it violates the 14th amendment's equal protection clause. The post-Civil War provision requires the government to treat similarly situated people the same. The court is weighing the case amid a range of other federal and state efforts to regulate the lives of transgender people , including which sports competitions they can join and which bathrooms they can use . In April, Trump's administration sued Maine for not complying with the government's push to ban transgender athletes in girls sports. Trump also has sought to block federal spending on gender-affirming care for those under 19 and a conservative majority of justices allowed him to move forward with plans to oust transgender people from the U.S. military . Trump's birthright citizenship order has been blocked by lower courts The court rarely hears arguments over emergency appeals, but it took up the administration's plea to narrow orders that have prevented the citizenship changes from taking effect anywhere in the U.S. The issue before the justices is whether to limit the authority of judges to issue nationwide injunctions, which have plagued both Republican and Democratic administrations in the past 10 years. These nationwide court orders have emerged as an important check on Trump's efforts and a source of mounting frustration to the Republican president and his allies. At arguments last month, the court seemed intent on keeping a block on the citizenship restrictions while still looking for a way to scale back nationwide court orders. It was not clear what such a decision might look like, but a majority of the court expressed concerns about what would happen if the administration were allowed, even temporarily, to deny citizenship to children born to parents who are in the country illegally. Democratic-led states, immigrants and rights groups who sued over Trump's executive order argued that it would upset the settled understanding of birthright citizenship that has existed for more than 125 years. The court seems likely to side with Maryland parents in a religious rights case over LGBTQ storybooks in public schools Parents in the Montgomery County school system, in suburban Washington, want to be able to pull their children out of lessons that use the storybooks, which the county added to the curriculum to better reflect the district's diversity. The school system at one point allowed parents to remove their children from those lessons, but then reversed course because it found the opt-out policy to be disruptive. Sex education is the only area of instruction with an opt-out provision in the county's schools. The school district introduced the storybooks in 2022, with such titles as 'Prince and Knight' and 'Uncle Bobby's Wedding.' The case is one of several religious rights cases at the court this term. The justices have repeatedly endorsed claims of religious discrimination in recent years. The decision also comes amid increases in recent years in books being banned from public school and public libraries. A three-year battle over congressional districts in Louisiana is making its second trip to the Supreme Court Lower courts have struck down two Louisiana congressional maps since 2022 and the justices are weighing whether to send state lawmakers back to the map-drawing board for a third time. The case involves the interplay between race and politics in drawing political boundaries in front of a conservative-led court that has been skeptical of considerations of race in public life. At arguments in March, several of the court's conservative justices suggested they could vote to throw out the map and make it harder, if not impossible, to bring redistricting lawsuits under the Voting Rights Act . Before the court now is a map that created a second Black majority congressional district among Louisiana's six seats in the House of Representatives. The district elected a Black Democrat in 2024. A three-judge court found that the state relied too heavily on race in drawing the district, rejecting Louisiana's arguments that politics predominated, specifically the preservation of the seats of influential members of Congress, including Speaker Mike Johnson. The Supreme Court ordered the challenged map to be used last year while the case went on. Lawmakers only drew that map after civil rights advocates won a court ruling that a map with one Black majority district likely violated the landmark voting rights law. The justices are weighing a Texas law aimed at blocking kids from seeing online pornography Texas is among more than a dozen states with age verification laws. The states argue the laws are necessary as smartphones have made access to online porn, including hardcore obscene material, almost instantaneous. The question for the court is whether the measure infringes on the constitutional rights of adults as well. The Free Speech Coalition, an adult-entertainment industry trade group, agrees that children shouldn't be seeing pornography. But it says the Texas law is written too broadly and wrongly affects adults by requiring them to submit personal identifying information online that is vulnerable to hacking or tracking. The justices appeared open to upholding the law, though they also could return it to a lower court for additional work. Some justices worried the lower court hadn't applied a strict enough legal standard in determining whether the Texas law and others like that could run afoul of the First Amendment. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
