European think tank pushes passage of proposed and very Byzantine space law

The European Union
This label would be more accurate if it read
“NOT made in the European Union”

A European think tank, the Centres for European Policy Networks (CEP), today released its analysis of a proposed space law it wants the European Union to adopt during its on-going fall session.

The Commission’s draft seeks to harmonize national regulations and establish common safety standards. According to the CEP, this is necessary to ensure a level playing field for space activities in the European single market.

This law was first released in June 2025. In reviewing it then, I concluded it would be a disaster for Europe should it be approved.

It imposes new environmental, safety, and cybersecurity regulations on the design of satellites and spacecraft in a manner that will likely slow development and competition in Europe significantly. And it applies these regulations not only to European companies but to the rest of the world’s space industry, should it do any operations at all in Europe.

CEP’s policy analysis [pdf] confirms my assessment, but thinks it is a great idea, especially its provisions that impose its rules on other countries.

In this context, the EU Space Act aims to extend the EU’s jurisdiction to space service providers based outside the EU who offer space-based data or services within the Union. This approach would ensure that no space operator is given an advantage by being exempt from the rules and prevents the circumvention of EU regulations. [emphasis mine]

In other words, the EU must rule everyone! What will instead happen if this law is passed is that American companies will simply refuse to do business with Europe. I can guarantee that SpaceX will pull its Starlink business from Europe if the EU tries to impose these regulations on it.

Europe meanwhile will find its own space industry hobbled trying to meet the law’s many odious regulations.

That the EU is still considering this law is remarkable in itself. The law was first proposed in 2024, but the vote on it was delayed a year when a number of EU members opposed it vehemently. Those nations all want their own nascent home-grown space industries to prosper, and see this law as bad policy that will kill them.

Whether that opposition can stand up to the globalist desires of the EU and Europe’s bureaucratic culture however remains very uncertain.

Japan passes law protecting property rights in space

Japan’s legislature on June 15th approved a new law designed to protect the ownership of the resources private entities extract for profit in space.

Japan’s legislation is similar to provisions in the Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act, passed by the U.S. Congress and signed into law by President Obama in 2015. That law grants U.S. companies rights to resources that they extract, but not property rights to celestial bodies, which would run afoul of the Outer Space Treaty. Luxembourg and the United Arab Emirates have since passed similar legislation.

All four countries are signatories of the Artemis Accords, which endorses the ability to extract and use space resources. “The Signatories affirm that the extraction of space resources does not inherently constitute national appropriation under Article II of the Outer Space Treaty, and that contracts and other legal instruments relating to space resources should be consistent with that Treaty,” the accords state.

Both Russia and China oppose such legislation, as well as the Artemis Accords, which have now been signed by eleven countries.

What this growing alignment of opposing sides means for future space operations by private companies is unclear, though it suggests these two countries will not honor those private property rights, which in turn suggests this legal disagreement is eventually going to lead to physical conflict in space.

Space law vs the Outer Space Treaty

My new op-ed at The Federalist is now online. Other than changing the title from my proposed version above to something a bit more unwieldy, “What You Need To Know About The Space Law Congress Is Considering,” they have posted it exactly as I wrote it.

The essay provides a very detailed analysis of the commercial space law that the House is presently considering. While they are proposing many good reforms, my conclusion unfortunately sums things up:

W.E.B. Du Bois, in studying the African slave trade, once asked, “How far in a State can a recognized moral wrong safely be compromised?” and answered his own question by saying that it is dangerous for “any nation, through carelessness and moral cowardice, [to allow] any social evil to grow. . . . From this we may conclude that it behooves nations as well as men to do things at the very moment when they ought to be done.”

The Outer Space Treaty poses limits on property rights. It also does not provide any mechanism for peacefully establishing sovereignty for any nation on any territory in space. Yet national sovereignty and territorial control is a given in all human societies. If we do nothing to establish a peaceful method for creating sovereignty and national territories in space, nations are going to find their own way to do it, often by force and violence. It behooves us to have the courage to face this issue now, and “do things at the very moment when they ought to be done.”

Read it all.

FAA wants your opinion about commercial space rules

The government marches on! The FAA wants your opinion about its future commercial space regulations.

Or to put it another way, how to stifle a newborn in the womb. In 2004 I said the new law allowing this kind of regulation was going to hurt the new space industries. We are about to see, with the FAA’s regulatory effort here, exactly how that will play out.

And I don’t think it will be good.