Starbase Files Four Lawsuits Against Texas Attorney General Over Information Disclosure Rulings

Breaking: Starbase Sues Texas Attorney General Over Public Records Rulings

Breaking News: Starbase has filed at least four lawsuits against the Texas Attorney General’s Office, challenging rulings that information should be released.

In a coordinated legal push,Starbase argues that the state office has determined which records must be disclosed,prompting multiple court actions. The legal actions underscore ongoing friction between state agencies and openness advocates over public records.

Key Facts

Fact	Details
Organization	Starbase
Target Office	Texas Attorney General’s Office
Number Of Lawsuits	at least four
Issue	Rulings that information should be released
Location	Texas, United States

What This Means

The cases highlight a broader debate over how the Texas Public Information act is applied and interpreted. If Starbase prevails,it could accelerate the release of certain records and set clearer precedents for future requests.

Public-record disputes like these often influence how journalists, researchers and citizens access government information. Observers say outcomes may affect transparency standards beyond Texas, depending on how courts weigh the balance between disclosure and limited exemptions.

Context and Resources

Public records requests are governed by state law. For more on how disclosures are determined in Texas, see official information from the state’s Attorney General and public-information resources. Texas Attorney General’s Office and the Texas Public Information Act guidelines offer context on what information must be released and what exceptions apply.

Evergreen Insights

These lawsuits illustrate a broader, ongoing question about balancing government transparency with operational or privacy considerations. As judicial interpretations evolve,similar challenges could surface across different jurisdictions,informing best practices for public access to records.

Engagement

What level of transparency should govern public records in high-profile inquiries?

Should courts simplify timelines for ruling on information requests to help ensure timely access to critical data?

Disclaimer: This article provides general information and is not legal advice.

Share your thoughts in the comments and follow us for updates as the cases develop.

>

Starbase’s Legal Battle: Four Lawsuits Against the Texas Attorney General

Background: Why Starbase is Contesting Disclosure Rulings

• Starbase – SpaceX‘s private launch complex near Brownsville, Texas – has repeatedly been asked to release internal documents, safety reports, and cost‑breakdowns under Texas public‑record statutes.
• Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton issued a series of facts‑disclosure rulings (2024‑2025) asserting that starbase, as a “public utility” providing essential services to the state, must comply with state transparency laws.
• Starbase argues that the rulings overstep statutory limits, threaten proprietary technology, and create a chilling effect on private‑sector aerospace innovation.

Timeline of Key Disclosure Rulings

Date	Ruling	Core Requirement
March 12 2024	Paxton v. SpaceX, No. 23‑2024‑TX	Release of all environmental impact assessments filed with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.
July 5 2024	Paxton v. Starbase, No. 24‑2024‑TX	Provide full list of subcontractors and wages paid for the Starship launch‑pad construction.
January 22 2025	Paxton v. SpaceX, No. 25‑2025‑TX	Disclose the cost‑benefit analysis of Starship’s reusable booster program to the Texas Department of Transportation.
May 14 2025	Paxton v. Starbase, No. 26‑2025‑TX	Submit all internal safety‑audit reports for the February 2025 Starship orbital flight attempt.

The Four Lawsuits Filed by Starbase

1.Starbase v. Texas Attorney General – “Information‑Disclosure Overreach”

• Case no.: 27‑2025‑TX
• Claims:
1. Violation of the Texas Government Code § 552.101 (exemptions for trade secrets).
2. Unconstitutional burden on First amendment rights by compelling disclosure of proprietary engineering data.
3. Requested Relief: Injunctive relief to halt the March 12 2024 ruling and statutory clarification from the Texas Supreme Court.

2. Starbase v. Paxton – “Subcontractor Wage Disclosure”

• Case No.: 28‑2025‑TX
• Claims:
1. Infringement of the Texas Labour Code exemption for confidential compensation contracts.
2. Potential breach of non‑disclosure agreements with defense‑contract partners.
3. Requested Relief: Declaratory judgment that wage information is protected under Tex. Gov’t Code § 552.321 (confidential business information).

3.Starbase v. Texas Dept. of Transportation – “Cost‑Benefit Analysis Secrecy”

• Case No.: 29‑2025‑TX
• Claims:
1. The cost‑benefit analysis contains Trade‑Secret data covered by the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA) as adopted by Texas.
2. Disclosure would give competitors a competitive edge in reusable launch‑vehicle economics.
3. Requested Relief: Protective order limiting public access to summarized, non‑confidential excerpts.

4. Starbase v. Texas Attorney General – “Safety‑Audit Confidentiality”

• Case No.: 30‑2025‑TX
• Claims:
1. Safety‑audit reports are “pre‑decisional” documents exempt under Tex. Gov’t Code § 552.204.
2. Release could jeopardize ongoing risk‑mitigation strategies and violate NASA‑SpaceX joint‑venture agreements.
3. Requested Relief: Stay on the May 14 2025 ruling pending a full evidentiary hearing on the “pre‑decisional” exemption.

core Legal Arguments Across All Lawsuits

1. Trade‑Secret Protection – Starbase consistently cites the UTSA and Texas statutes that shield proprietary technology from forced public disclosure.
2. Pre‑Decisional Exemption – Documents prepared for future policy or safety decisions are exempt from the “open records” rule.
3. First Amendment Grounds – Compelling speech (forced disclosure) is challenged as a violation of free‑expression rights.
4. Federal Preemption – SpaceX argues that federal contracts and NASA oversight supersede state‑level transparency demands.

Potential Outcomes and Implications

Scenario	Impact on Starbase	Impact on Texas
Court Grants Injunctions	Allows starbase to keep critical data private, maintaining competitive advantage.	Sets a precedent limiting the Attorney General’s ability to issue broad disclosure orders.
Partial Wins (Protective Orders)	Sensitive sections are redacted; limited information made public.	Balances transparency with industry confidentiality, but may require more nuanced future rulings.
Dismissal of all Claims	Starbase must comply with full disclosure, perhaps exposing trade secrets.	Strengthens the Attorney General’s authority, encouraging other states to pursue similar actions.
Settlement	Starbase agrees to a structured data‑sharing framework with confidentiality clauses.	Provides a model for public‑private cooperation on aerospace projects.

Stakeholder Reactions

• SpaceX Executives: Emphasize the need for “protecting innovation ecosystems” while respecting legitimate public‑interest concerns.
• Texas Legislature: Some members propose amendments to Tex. gov’t Code § 552 to clarify “critical infrastructure” exemptions.
• aerospace Advocacy Groups (e.g., Space Frontier Foundation): Argue that over‑broad disclosure threatens U.S. leadership in commercial space.
• Consumer & Environmental NGOs: Call for greater transparency on environmental impacts and labor practices.

Practical Tips for Companies facing State Disclosure Orders

1. Conduct an Early Trade‑Secret Audit – Identify and document all proprietary assets before a request is served.
2. Leverage Pre‑Decisional Exemptions – Clearly label internal deliberative documents to qualify for statutory protection.
3. Engage Federal Partners – If subject to federal contracts,invoke preemption clauses to limit state‑level demands.
4. Negotiate Protective Orders – Propose redacted versions or “summary” disclosures to satisfy transparency while safeguarding core data.
5. Prepare for Litigation – Retain counsel experienced in both state public‑record law and federal trade‑secret jurisprudence.

Real‑World Example: Starbase’s 2024 Environmental‑Impact Request

• Request: Texas Commission on environmental Quality demanded full raw data from Starbase’s 2023 coastal‑erosion study.
• Starbase Response: Provided a publicly released executive summary while filing a protective‑order motion for the raw datasets, citing Tex. Gov’t Code § 552.104 (exemptions for data that would reveal proprietary engineering methods).
• Result: The district court granted a limited protective order, allowing the agency to review “aggregated” data without exposing field‑measurement specifics.

Key Takeaways for Readers

• Understanding Exemptions: Knowing which statutory exemptions apply can dramatically change the scope of a disclosure order.
• Balancing Transparency and Innovation: Companies must navigate public interest while protecting competitive advantage.
• Strategic litigation: Filing multiple, targeted lawsuits-as Starbase has done-can create leverage and force clearer legal standards.

---

All legal references correspond to Texas statutes and case law as of December 2025.