FCC Targets Chinese Drones: New Rules Could Ground DJI in U.S. Airspace

The U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is taking a harder stance on Chinese-manufactured drones—specifically targeting market leader DJI—by proposing new rules that could effectively bar their use in critical infrastructure and public safety operations. The move aligns with broader interagency efforts to mitigate perceived national security risks posed by foreign-made unmanned aerial systems (UAS), especially those linked to the People’s Republic of China (PRC).

FCC Proposes Rule to Expand Covered List Authority

On October 25, 2025, the FCC issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) seeking public comment on expanding its authority under the Secure Networks Act to prohibit authorization of communications equipment deemed a national security threat—even if such equipment does not rely on federal subsidies. This marks a significant shift from current policy that only restricts gear purchased through the Universal Service Fund (USF).

The proposed rule would allow the FCC to deny or revoke equipment authorizations for entities listed on its “Covered List,” which currently includes Huawei Technologies and ZTE Corporation. Crucially, the NPRM explicitly mentions DJI as a candidate for future designation under this expanded authority.

Denying authorization would prevent new DJI products from being marketed or sold in the United States and could lead to de facto bans on their use in sensitive sectors like energy utilities, emergency response units, and law enforcement agencies.

Why Is DJI Under Scrutiny?

DJI dominates the global commercial drone market with an estimated 70% share and is widely used by U.S. first responders, infrastructure inspectors, and hobbyists alike. However, multiple U.S. government agencies have flagged cybersecurity concerns regarding data transmission practices in DJI platforms.

• In 2020, the Department of Commerce added DJI to its Entity List over alleged human rights abuses linked to surveillance activities in Xinjiang.
• The Department of Defense designated DJI as a “Chinese military company” under Section 1237 of the FY1999 NDAA.
• The Department of Homeland Security has warned about potential data exfiltration risks when using Chinese-made drones near sensitive sites.

While DJI has denied all allegations and emphasized its compliance with international privacy standards—including offering offline modes for sensitive missions—the perception among U.S. policymakers remains skeptical.

Implications for Public Safety and Infrastructure Operators

If adopted, the FCC’s rule could have immediate operational impacts across multiple sectors:

• Public Safety: Many police departments rely heavily on low-cost DJI drones for tactical surveillance and search-and-rescue missions. A ban would require costly fleet replacements or capability gaps.
• Critical Infrastructure: Energy utilities and rail operators use DJI platforms for routine inspections of power lines and tracks—a practice now potentially threatened by regulatory uncertainty.
• Agriculture & Construction: While not directly tied to national security concerns, these industries may face supply chain disruptions or software restrictions if broader bans are enacted.

The Association for Uncrewed Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) has urged regulators to ensure any restrictions are based on clear technical criteria rather than country-of-origin alone—warning that blanket bans could stifle innovation without improving security posture.

Diverging Agency Approaches Reflect Interagency Tensions

The FCC’s move follows CISA’s earlier advisories against deploying foreign-made drones near federal facilities but diverges from some other agency positions. For example:

• The Department of Justice barred grant-funded purchases of foreign drones but allowed waivers under specific conditions.
• The FAA has not formally restricted airworthiness certification based on manufacturer origin but has limited Beyond Visual Line Of Sight (BVLOS) waivers involving non-U.S.-made systems.

This fragmented regulatory landscape creates uncertainty for drone operators who must navigate overlapping federal guidance while maintaining operational readiness.

A Look Ahead: Domestic Alternatives vs Market Reality

The Biden administration has promoted domestic drone manufacturers through programs like DIU’s Blue sUAS initiative—but uptake remains limited due to higher costs and narrower product offerings compared to Chinese competitors like DJI or Autel Robotics.

If FCC restrictions proceed without viable domestic substitutes at scale, agencies may face capability shortfalls or increased procurement costs. Some analysts argue this could push users toward unauthorized imports or gray-market firmware modifications—ironically increasing cyber risk rather than reducing it.

Conclusion: Policy Tradeoffs Between Security and Capability

The proposed rule underscores growing bipartisan concern over supply chain vulnerabilities in emerging tech domains like UAVs—but also highlights tradeoffs between national security objectives and operational flexibility. As public comments close later this year and final rules are drafted in early 2026, stakeholders across defense-adjacent industries will be watching closely to assess how far-reaching any eventual ban might be—and whether it will reshape America’s drone ecosystem permanently.