News
Tesla Fremont factory reopening defended by county officials: ‘TSLA has not been given an exception’
Tesla’s situation at the Fremont facility has been clarified by Alameda County health officials, who published their response to questions they have received from the media. The updated information from the county was posted in a press release that was published on Wednesday night.
Tensions between Tesla and Alameda County came to a head recently after the company was set to reopen at with “limited operations” last Friday under conditions that were mandated by California Governor Gavin Newsom. However, Alameda County health officials prohibited Tesla from reopening its Fremont plant on May 8.
Under the leadership of CEO Elon Musk, Tesla reopened the Fremont factory on Sunday, May 10, against the wishes of county health officials. Media members asked several questions about why Tesla had not been penalized for not listening to instructions. This was explored in one of the inquiries asked by members of the media.
On Monday, Elon Musk tweeted that “Tesla is restarting production today against Alameda County rules. I will be on the line with everyone else. If anyone is arrested, I ask that it only be me.” Given that the CEO acknowledges that production has restarted against the county health order’s guidelines, why does your statement indicate that there may be a “possible reopening next week”?
Alameda County officials responded to this inquiry by clarifying that Tesla is operating above basic minimum operations due to the nature of the auto industry, which requires a lead-up period before production facilities could return to normal operations.
“We have met with Tesla representatives and have confirmed that Tesla is not engaged in full operations, contrary to media reports. Tesla has confirmed that its operations require a substantial lead time to become fully operational, and their current operations are only slightly above Minimum Business Operations. The City of Fremont Police Department – which had done multiple site-visits at the plant over multiple years, and which has knowledge of what Tesla’s normal operations look like – will conduct a site visit today to confirm Tesla’s claims.
“Given the unique nature and scale of automobile manufacturing and the safety measures agreed to by Tesla, we concluded that ramp up activity with a minimal increase in minimum basic operations can occur safely.”
Earlier reports indicated that Tesla’s employee parking lots in Fremont might have been just as occupied on Sunday and Monday as it was for a typical work shift. However, Alameda County officials clarified that the facility was only operating under conditions that were slightly above minimum basic operations. This action is due to “substantial lead time to become fully operational,” the county explained.
Another question suggested that Tesla received special treatment from Alameda County. CEO Elon Musk stated earlier this week that the facility was reopened despite the county’s stance. No disciplinary action was taken by the County, and journalists wanted to know why. This was addressed in an inquiry from a member of the media.
“Given that Tesla has been given an exception, what does that do to the moral authority of the County when other businesses try to open before they’re allowed? I think the question of equal enforcement of the law is an important public policy issue.”
Alameda County officials clarified that Tesla had not received any sort of preferential treatment and that Tesla’s safety plan was clear enough to indicate that it was safe to begin production as early as next week.
“Tesla has not been given an exception. The role of the Public Health Department is to protect our residents and the individuals who come to work in Alameda County. We do that by reviewing safety plans and working with local law enforcement, who hold the authority to enforce the Health Officer Orders. We hope and expect that other businesses see the value of continuing to abide by the Health Officer Order, as it applies to them, in order to protect their workforce, our most vulnerable residents, and our health care systems in general. Because of the hard sacrifices of our local businesses, we anticipate another phase of reopening as early as next week.”
The full Press Release from Alameda County could be accessed in full below.
press-release-2020.05.13 by Simon Alvarez on Scribd
Tesla short sellers won big following the company’s massive fall on Wall Street after it reported subpar Earnings on Wednesday.
Tesla short sellers collected about $4.12 billion in single-day profits on Thursday, according to Bloomberg. Shares fell as much as 15 percent during Thursday’s session. It closed as one of the worst days for Tesla on Wall Street in the past three years.
Investors sold off the stock after Tesla said it would aggressively direct its spending toward AI and its Optimus robot project. The company had record revenues, which were driven by one of the strongest quarters in terms of vehicle deliveries in company history.
However, it missed EPS estimates by reporting just $0.33, a far cry from the $0.53 analysts expected.
S3 Partners reported that about 3 percent of Tesla’s outstanding stock is sold short. Managing Director at S3, Ihor Dusaniwsky, provided the short seller’s potential profit, as well as another figure: shorts have likely had paper gains of $8.92 billion this year, as Tesla shares are down 30 percent in 2026.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Tesla has burned short sellers many times in the past, but the company’s latest Earnings Call was a chance for those skeptics to taste some payback. Although the company gave some very transparent information regarding future projects, the rollout of Robotaxi, Optimus, and Semi, many investors took their profits on Thursday.
Notable short sellers like Michael Burry have been transparent about their skepticism around Tesla shares. Burry just revealed three weeks ago that he had opened up a new short on the stock, stating he shorted Tesla shares at $416.22. “Happy it jumped back to this level,” he said in a blog post.
At the time of publication, Tesla shares were down about 3 percent and the stock was trading at $309.92.
Tesla’s long-standing saga regarding its door handles and a manual release has entered its latest chapter, and as a result, a big change is coming.
On Friday, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) denied Tesla’s petition that was seeking a defect investigation into roughly 180,000 Model 3 vehicles for an issue involving the emergency mechanical door release.
🚨 The NHTSA denied a petition from Tesla that would have thrown out concerns regarding its door handles.
NHTSA said Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect warranting an investigation. The agency said a rulemaking process would be a better strategy. pic.twitter.com/j6PzUBM1mT
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 24, 2026
NHTSA said that Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect in the door handles or their emergency releases. Instead, the agency determined that it would rather solve the issue of the lack of labeling or location of emergency mechanical door releases and the federal safety rules that govern them.
Essentially, the NHTSA wants to create and enforce rules that would require automakers to make emergency door latch releases more clearly labeled in a car. Despite a Tesla having manual door releases on all four passenger doors, many people do not know they exist or how they work.
Tesla addresses door handle complaints with simple engineering fix
In recent times, Tesla has faced some criticism involving its door handles, specifically because some occupants have reported that they are unable to exit their vehicles after losing power. The door handles on a Tesla are electronically operated, but in the event that the 12V battery dies, there is a manual release that can be used.
The NHTSA only identified a single complaint involving the mechanical door releases: a 2022 Model 3 owner said the release was concealed and unlabeled after the vehicle lost power after a front-end collision. It has also already started to create a separate rulemaking process to make emergency door-egress systems more obvious.
It should be noted that all Teslas have mechanical emergency door releases, but they are placed in various locations as the vehicles have aged and been redesigned from year to year. Refer to the safety manual for your vehicle if you have any confusion about where the emergency releases are and how they work.
News
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
SpaceX pushed Starship Flight 13 to Friday, blaming weather instead of the previous engine issues.
SpaceX called off Thursday’s launch attempt of Starship Flight 13, pushing the mission to Friday because of weather tied to Tropical Storm Bertha. The company confirmed the delay on X, noting “Now targeting Friday, July 24 for Starship’s thirteenth flight test, due to weather. A key objective for the flight test is to get clear imagery from the ground of Starship’s heatshield as it flies at a higher dynamic pressure during ascent, which won’t be possible with today’s weather conditions.”
This is the second delay for Flight 13 in two weeks. SpaceX first tried to launch the mission on July 16, but the countdown ended in an automated abort at T-0 when four of Super Heavy Booster 20’s 33 Raptor engines failed to ignite. Musk said at the time that two Raptors would need to be removed and replaced, as Teslarati reported. The company spent the following week destacking Ship 40 and Booster 20, swapping engines, and running leak checks before restacking the vehicle on Pad 2 Wednesday night, according to Spaceflight Now’s live coverage.
Unlike the engine problem, Thursday’s delay has nothing to do with the hardware. SpaceX wants clean footage of Starship’s heat shield captured from the ground as the vehicle flies through max dynamic pressure, something the storm’s cloud cover over South Texas would not allow. The company said visibility should improve for Friday’s attempt, with the same 90 minute window opening at 5:45 p.m. CT.
Flight 13 will be the second outing for the V3 versions of Starship and Super Heavy, following their debut on Flight 12 in May. The mission carries 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, the first time SpaceX has flown operational satellites rather than mass simulators on Starship. Six of those satellites are fitted with cameras to inspect the heat shield from a different angle during ascent, giving engineers a second data source beyond the ground imagery the weather is currently blocking.
Booster 20 will attempt a boostback burn and a splashdown landing burn in the Gulf of America, while Ship 40 follows a suborbital trajectory toward a landing in the Indian Ocean. The flight plan largely mirrors Flight 12, though the booster will run a more aggressive ascent burn after max Q this time, and the ship’s heat shield includes load sensing tiles meant to measure stress at the higher dynamic pressure SpaceX is targeting.
If Friday’s attempt succeeds, Flight 13 could be the last suborbital test in the program. SpaceX is already looking to push for an orbital flight on Flight 14.
Tesla short sellers win big after shares fall after earnings
Tesla door handle saga gets its latest chapter and a big change is coming
