DJI sues FCC over drone ban: here is DJI’s argument

DJI has filed a federal lawsuit difficult the FCC’s choice to ban its merchandise from the U.S. market, arguing the company exceeded its authority and violated the Fifth Modification when it added DJI’s drones to the Coated Checklist with out ever figuring out a selected safety risk.

In December 2025, the Federal Communication Fee added all foreign-manufactured drones and drone parts to its “Coated Checklist” – successfully banning them from receiving the tools authorizations required to legally function in the USA. The information has upset the majority of drone pilots, in addition to even another American drone corporations.

I shortly speculated that many corporations, lobbyists and politicians would push again on the legality of such a ban. And I used to be proper. This month, DJI filed a lawsuit difficult the FCC’s choice so as to add us to the Coated Checklist.

The petition, filed February 20, 2026 within the U.S. Courtroom of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, marks the start of what may very well be a years-long authorized battle over whether or not the federal government’s drone restrictions are justified nationwide safety coverage or unconstitutional overreach. Right here’s what you should learn about DJI’s lawsuit in opposition to the FCC:

DJI’s 3 essential arguments

1. The FCC by no means recognized an precise risk

“The FCC can add merchandise to the Coated Checklist solely once they current a nationwide safety risk, but it has by no means recognized any risk related to DJI or its merchandise,” a DJI spokesperson instructed The Drone Lady in a ready assertion.

After years of presidency scrutiny, a number of safety evaluations, and repeated Congressional hearings, nobody has publicly demonstrated that DJI drones have really been used to spy on Individuals or compromise nationwide safety. The FCC relied on a December 21 Nationwide Safety Dedication that concluded foreign-made drones posed “unacceptable dangers” with out offering particular proof about DJI’s merchandise.

2. DJI was denied due course of

“Regardless of repeated efforts to interact with the federal government, DJI has by no means been given the prospect to supply data to handle or refute any considerations,” the spokesperson mentioned.

DJI has publicly requested for safety audits for years. Adam Welsh, DJI’s head of worldwide coverage, wrote to Protection Secretary Pete Hegseth in December providing to “be open and clear, and offer you the required data to finish an intensive evaluation.”

As a substitute, the FCC issued a ruling based mostly on an interagency willpower with out giving DJI a possibility to reply. The petition states that “the FCC exceeded its statutory authority, failed to look at statutorily required procedures, and violated the Fifth Modification when it purported so as to add DJI’s merchandise to the Coated Checklist.”

3. The ban causes substantial hurt

“The itemizing causes nice hurt to DJI and its clients,” the spokesperson mentioned. “It carelessly restricts DJI’s enterprise within the U.S. and summarily denies U.S. clients entry to its newest know-how, whereas customers elsewhere proceed to learn.”

“Individuals throughout industries—together with small enterprise homeowners, public security officers, farmers, and creators—have been and can proceed to be affected, dropping entry to the instruments they depend on to make a dwelling and save lives.”

A Pilot Institute survey of 8,056 drone operators helps this: 43.4% mentioned dropping entry to new DJI drones would have a “probably business-ending influence,” and 96.7% of operators at present use DJI merchandise.

The FCC goes past the ruling

The petition states that “The FCC has additionally used the Ruling as a justification to severely limit DJI’s means to import its present merchandise, in addition to new merchandise exterior the scope of the Ruling, into the USA.”

The FCC ban technically solely prevents NEW fashions from getting tools authorizations. Current merchandise with pre-December 22 authorization ought to stay authorized, which embrace anticipated new drones just like the DJI Avata 360.

However in keeping with DJI, the FCC is limiting imports past what the order requires — probably affecting drones that have been imagined to be grandfathered in.

DJI’s authorized arguments

DJI’s petition makes three particular claims. All the beneath are strong authorized hooks, although nationwide safety instances sometimes obtain substantial deference from courts. Are are these three claims.

The FCC exceeded its statutory authority — DJI argues the FCC didn’t set up that DJI merchandise really pose nationwide safety threats.

The federal government has not been capable of present precise proof of DJI drones getting used for espionage or posing demonstrated safety threats. DJI’s lawsuit forces the federal government to both produce this proof in court docket or admit it doesn’t exist.

The FCC didn’t comply with required procedures — Administrative legislation requires businesses to supply reasoned explanations, take into account related components, and provides affected events discover and alternative to reply.

The FCC violated the Fifth Modification — The Due Course of Clause requires truthful procedures earlier than the federal government considerably restricts property rights. DJI’s Fifth Modification declare is especially attention-grabbing. The Due Course of Clause requires truthful procedures earlier than authorities considerably restricts property pursuits, however nationwide safety instances get particular deference. Courts hardly ever second-guess government department safety determinations, particularly relating to overseas corporations.

The query: Is Due Course of safety robust sufficient to require a listening to even in nationwide safety instances? Or does nationwide safety deference trump procedural protections?

Going previous drones, the way in which the court docket guidelines on it will impacts how the U.S. authorities restricts different overseas know-how merchandise sooner or later.

So what’s subsequent?

The petition requests the Ninth Circuit “maintain illegal, vacate, enjoin, and put aside the Ruling.” DJI desires the court docket to throw out the FCC’s December 22 ruling completely. DJI has additionally filed a movement for reconsideration with the FCC, which has invited oppositions and replies.

Right here’s what possible occurs subsequent:

• Brief time period (subsequent few months): Authorities responds, potential preliminary injunction request, briefing interval
• Medium time period (6-18 months): Oral arguments, court docket choice, potential appeals
• Long run (1-3 years): Ultimate decision at Ninth Circuit, en banc evaluation, or Supreme Courtroom — or settlement earlier than conclusion

DJI’s lawsuit comes amid developments suggesting the ban is extra versatile than offered, which embrace:

This sample suggests restrictions are being handled as negotiable commerce coverage somewhat than pressing safety imperatives — which helps DJI’s argument that the “unacceptable danger” willpower lacks factual basis.

Listed here are a number of potential outcomes for drone pilots:

• Greatest case: The court docket invalidates the ruling, restoring market entry
• Good case: The court docket requires correct procedures, creating delay and higher requirements
• Reasonable case: The lawsuit pressures negotiated settlement with safety audits as an alternative of blanket ban
• Even dropping may assist: A years-long authorized battle creates house for political adjustments or commerce negotiations

What drone pilots ought to do now

DJI’s lawsuit doesn’t instantly change something for drone pilots.

Keep in mind, present DJI drones usually are not banned. All drones which might be authorised on the market within the U.S. (sure, which means something obtainable on Amazon, B&H, Greatest Purchase or different main retailers…or even used from different pilots), can nonetheless legally be purchased and bought. Merchandise authorised earlier than December 22 can nonetheless be bought.

It’s simply that future DJI fashions received’t have the ability to get tools authorization below this present state.

And don’t surrender hope, both. The Trump administration has proven willingness to reverse insurance policies shortly. A “nice deal” with China might embrace market entry for DJI with enhanced safety necessities.

DJI has authentic procedural arguments. After years of requesting safety audits, they obtained banned with out a listening to based mostly on obscure determinations that don’t establish particular threats.

However DJI faces an uphill battle. Courts give huge deference to government nationwide safety determinations. The federal government will argue that requiring detailed public proof would compromise intelligence sources and strategies.

My prediction: The Ninth Circuit possible received’t overturn the ban outright. They may require higher procedures or extra particular justifications, resulting in a modified method — safety audits, enhanced monitoring, information localization necessities — somewhat than blanket prohibition.

Extra possible than a clear court docket victory? I believe DJI’s lawsuit will create sufficient uncertainty and delay that it will get resolved by means of commerce negotiations somewhat than judicial choice.

Right here’s what DJI mentioned in an emailed assertion after submitting the lawsuit: “DJI takes the safety of its merchandise very severely. The corporate has lengthy advocated for impartial, goal evaluation of its merchandise. As a part of our dedication to the U.S. market and our clients throughout quite a few industries, we are going to proceed to interact constructively with the FCC and different stakeholders.”

Associated