DJI has filed a federal lawsuit difficult the FCC’s resolution 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 Listing with out ever figuring out a particular safety risk.
In December 2025, the Federal Communication Fee added all foreign-manufactured drones and drone elements to its “Coated Listing” – 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 resolution so as to add us to the Coated Listing.
The petition, filed February 20, 2026 within the U.S. Court docket 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 foremost arguments
1. The FCC by no means recognized an precise risk
“The FCC can add merchandise to the Coated Listing solely after they current a nationwide safety risk, but it has by no means recognized any risk related to DJI or its merchandise,” a DJI spokesperson informed The Drone Lady in a ready assertion.
After years of presidency scrutiny, a number of safety opinions, and repeated Congressional hearings, nobody has publicly demonstrated that DJI drones have truly been used to spy on Individuals or compromise nationwide safety. The FCC relied on a December 21 Nationwide Safety Willpower 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 possibility to supply info to deal with 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 mandatory info to finish a radical assessment.”
As an alternative, 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 watch statutorily required procedures, and violated the Fifth Modification when it purported so as to add DJI’s merchandise to the Coated Listing.”
3. The ban causes substantial hurt
“The itemizing causes nice hurt to DJI and its prospects,” the spokesperson mentioned. “It carelessly restricts DJI’s enterprise within the U.S. and summarily denies U.S. prospects entry to its newest expertise, whereas customers elsewhere proceed to learn.”
“Individuals throughout industries—together with small enterprise house owners, public security officers, farmers, and creators—have been and can proceed to be affected, shedding 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 shedding entry to new DJI drones would have a “doubtlessly business-ending impression,” and 96.7% of operators presently 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 prohibit DJI’s skill to import its current merchandise, in addition to new merchandise outdoors 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 — doubtlessly affecting drones that had been purported to be grandfathered in.
DJI’s authorized arguments
DJI’s petition makes three particular claims. The entire under are stable authorized hooks, although nationwide safety circumstances 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 truly 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 did not observe required procedures — Administrative legislation requires companies to supply reasoned explanations, contemplate related components, and provides affected events discover and alternative to reply.
The FCC violated the Fifth Modification — The Due Course of Clause requires honest procedures earlier than the federal government considerably restricts property rights. DJI’s Fifth Modification declare is especially fascinating. The Due Course of Clause requires honest procedures earlier than authorities considerably restricts property pursuits, however nationwide safety circumstances get particular deference. Courts hardly ever second-guess government department safety determinations, particularly concerning international corporations.
The query: Is Due Course of safety sturdy sufficient to require a listening to even in nationwide safety circumstances? Or does nationwide safety deference trump procedural protections?
Going previous drones, the best way the court docket guidelines on it will impacts how the U.S. authorities restricts different international expertise merchandise sooner or later.
So what’s subsequent?
The petition requests the Ninth Circuit “maintain illegal, vacate, enjoin, and put aside the Ruling.” DJI needs 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 doubtless occurs subsequent:
- Brief time period (subsequent few months): Authorities responds, attainable preliminary injunction request, briefing interval
- Medium time period (6-18 months): Oral arguments, court docket resolution, attainable appeals
- Long run (1-3 years): Remaining decision at Ninth Circuit, en banc assessment, or Supreme Court docket — or settlement earlier than conclusion
DJI’s lawsuit comes amid developments suggesting the ban is extra versatile than introduced, which embrace:
This sample suggests restrictions are being handled as negotiable commerce coverage quite than pressing safety imperatives — which helps DJI’s argument that the “unacceptable threat” willpower lacks factual basis.
Listed below are a couple of attainable 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
- Average case: The lawsuit pressures negotiated settlement with safety audits as an alternative of blanket ban
- Even shedding may assist: A years-long authorized battle creates area 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 will not be banned. All drones which are accredited on the market within the U.S. (sure, which means something out there on Amazon, B&H, Greatest Purchase or different main retailers…or even used from different pilots), can nonetheless legally be purchased and bought. Merchandise accredited earlier than December 22 can nonetheless be bought.
It’s simply that future DJI fashions gained’t be capable of get tools authorization underneath this present state.
And don’t quit 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 reputable procedural arguments. After years of requesting safety audits, they acquired 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 monumental 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 doubtless gained’t overturn the ban outright. They may require higher procedures or extra particular justifications, resulting in a modified method — safety audits, enhanced monitoring, knowledge localization necessities — quite than blanket prohibition.
Extra doubtless than a clear court docket victory? I feel DJI’s lawsuit will create sufficient uncertainty and delay that it will get resolved by commerce negotiations quite than judicial resolution.
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 assessment of its merchandise. As a part of our dedication to the U.S. market and our prospects throughout quite a few industries, we’ll proceed to interact constructively with the FCC and different stakeholders.”
Associated
Uncover extra from The Drone Lady
Subscribe to get the newest posts despatched to your electronic mail.
