Commitments and Contingencies	12 Months Ended
Commitments and Contingencies	Dec. 31, 2024
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Purchase Obligations The Company purchases goods and services from a variety of suppliers in the ordinary course of business. Purchase obligations are defined as agreements that are enforceable and legally binding and that specify all significant terms, including fixed or minimum quantities to be purchased, fixed, minimum, or variable price provisions, and the approximate timing of the transaction. The Company had purchase obligations primarily for purchases of inventory, R&D, and general and administrative activities totaling $122.3 million as of December 31, 2024. Legal Matters From time to time, the Company is involved in actions, claims, suits and other proceedings in the ordinary course of business, including assertions by third parties relating to intellectual property infringement, breaches of contract or warranties or employment-related matters. When it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated, the Company records a liability for such loss contingencies. The Company’s estimates regarding potential losses and materiality are based on the Company’s judgment and assessment of the claims utilizing currently available information. Although the Company will continue to reassess its reserves and estimates based on future developments, the Company’s objective assessment of the legal merits of such claims may not always be predictive of the outcome and actual results may vary from the Company’s current estimates. The Company’s current legal accrual is not material to the financial statements. On May 26, 2023, a putative class action styled Johnson v. Luminar Technologies, Inc., et al., Case No. 6:23-cv-00982-PGB-LHP, was filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, against the Company and an employee. The suit asserts purported claims on behalf of purchasers of the Company’s securities between February 28, 2023 and March 17, 2023 under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act for allegedly misleading statements regarding the Company’s photonic integrated circuits technology. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on December 29, 2023, the motion was granted, and on July 8, 2024 Plaintiff filed an amended complaint. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint on August 22, 2024, and for the second time, the Defendants’ motion to dismiss was granted on December 12, 2024 based on the conclusion that the Plaintiff failed to adequately plead both the materiality and scienter elements of his claims. For procedural reasons, the court gave the Plaintiff leave to amend, and on January 10, 2025, Plaintiff filed a third amended complaint in the securities class action. The Company intends to continue to vigorously defend the litigation. The Company presently does not expect this matter to have a material adverse impact on the Company’s financial results and did not accrue anything related to this matter as of December 31, 2024. On October 21, 2023, a shareholder derivative suit entitled Bhavsar v. McAuliffe, et al. Bhavsar v. McAuliffe, et al., No. 6:23-cv-02037 was filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida against directors of the Company and an employee. The suit avers claims for purported breaches of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, waste, aiding and abetting, and contribution under Sections 10(b) and 21D of the Exchange Act on the basis of the same purported wrongdoing alleged in the first lawsuit described above. In November 2023, three additional shareholder derivative suits averring similar claims to Bhavsar were filed in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware: Lance Dechant, et al. v. Alec E. Gores, et al., C.A. No. 23-cv-01318-UNA, Hutchinson v. Russell, et al., C.A. No. 23-cv-01345-UNA, and Ulerio v. Russell, et al., C.A. No. 23-cv-01359-UNA. The Company disputes the allegations in the complaint and intends to vigorously defend the litigation. The Company has determined that the likelihood of this matter resulting in a material adverse impact on the Company’s financial results is remote. On March 21, 2024, a putative class action styled Smith v. Gores, et al., C.A. No. 2024-0285-MTZ (Del. Ch.) was filed in the Delaware Court of Chancery against the Company and the members of its Board of Directors. The lawsuit asserted claims on behalf of a putative class comprised of all stockholders other than defendants and any current directors or officers of the Company. The plaintiff alleged that certain provisions in the Company’s advance notice bylaws (the “Challenged Provisions”) were invalid and void and that the members of the Board have breached their fiduciary duty of loyalty by adopting and maintaining the Challenged Provisions. In addition to seeking declaratory, equitable, and injunctive relief, the plaintiff sought an award of attorneys’ fees and other costs and expenses on behalf of the putative class. On September 4, 2024, the court granted the parties stipulation to dismiss this action with prejudice, as to the individual plaintiff only, in light of certain amendments to the Challenged Provisions adopted by the Board, which rendered the action moot. The court retained jurisdiction of the action solely for the purpose of adjudicating an attorneys’ fees and expenses application by the plaintiff. Solely to avoid the time and expense of continued litigation, the parties agreed to resolve the fee application in exchange for a payment by the Company of $125,000 to plaintiff’s counsel. This matter is now closed.