That's a very irresponsible story written and published by Fred Lambert. I know most of us have come to terms with the fact that he's not a real journalist but most of the world probably doesn't know that yet.
Let's look at the conflicting statements:
and:
Basically, it's unprofessional to say they are "apparently planning to defy a shutdown order" while admitting it's unclear whether they have an exemption. And they fail to mention the possibility that the order contains a built-in exemption for autos (acting as if they would need to be granted an exemption).
The whole thing is written with the obvious intention of slamming Tesla without having enough information to support their original claim that it looks like Tesla is defying the order.
It seems to me that we can all agree that Teslas are cars and need a supply of auto parts. Most of those parts come from Fremont or Nevada (depending upon the part). They are actually manufactured in these two locations and shipped to Tesla delivery and service centers. I would like to know how shutting either one of these facilities would comply with the goal of maintaining a supply of auto parts (when it comes to Tesla cars). You can't get Tesla parts at a Ford or GM dealership and, with very few exceptions, you can't get parts for a Tesla from third parties. If your car is in an accident and needs a new body panel, it will come from the Fremont plant.
It doesn't take a genius journalist to realize the Fremont plant must remain in at least partial operation (along with Tesla delivery and service centers) in order to maintain a supply of Tesla parts. Like all modern businesses, they maintain a JIT (just in time) inventory system (instead of stockpiling huge amounts of spare parts in warehouses).
The presses must roll!