For years, Washington’s concerns about DJI have largely played out at the policy level: bans, warnings, executive orders, and legislation aimed squarely at the world’s largest civilian drone manufacturer. Now, that approach appears to be shifting. Instead of focusing only on DJI, US lawmakers are now publicly calling out individual American companies they believe may still be using Chinese drones at some of the country’s most sensitive sites.
In letters sent to major construction and engineering firms, Senators Maggie Hassan (D-NH) and Gary Peters (D-MI) are pressing companies, including Bechtel, Hensel Phelps, and Brasfield & Gorrie, for detailed explanations of their relationships with DJI and their compliance with federal restrictions on Chinese-made drones. The move marks a notable escalation, one that pulls federal contractors directly into the ongoing national security debate surrounding DJI.
The senators didn’t mince words. They warned that DJI drones, when used at secure facilities such as nuclear weapons labs, missile bases, ports of entry, and military installations, could create pathways for sensitive data to reach the Chinese government. While DJI has repeatedly denied those claims, lawmakers say the risk is serious enough to warrant direct scrutiny of companies operating the drones — not just the company that makes them.
What makes this moment different is specificity. The letters don’t simply restate existing bans. They cite named projects, public marketing materials, social media posts, and past collaborations that appear to show contractors continuing to rely on DJI technology despite years of federal warnings.
Bechtel, for example, has worked on nuclear weapons facilities and missile sites and was among the earliest construction firms to adopt drones. Hensel Phelps has built infrastructure at ports of entry along the US Southwest Border and previously received government approval for advanced drone operations. Brasfield & Gorrie has worked on military bases and border facilities and has been featured in DJI case studies highlighting drone-based data collection.
Lawmakers argue that this history matters. Construction drones such as the DJI Matrice 4E aren’t just flying cameras; they’re mapping tools capable of capturing high-resolution imagery, facility layouts, terrain data, and potential security vulnerabilities. At sensitive sites, even routine progress photos can cross into classified territory.
This is why in their letters, the senators aren’t just asking whether DJI drones are being used; they’re demanding a granular accounting of drone operations across sensitive government projects. Each company is being asked to list every drone and drone component it owns, leases, or operates, including make, model, and when the equipment was first put into service. Lawmakers also want contract-by-contract disclosures showing where drones were flown on Department of Defense, Homeland Security, intelligence, or nuclear-related projects, even if drones were not an official contract deliverable.
What’s more, the requests go well beyond hardware. Congress is asking for detailed explanations of how drone data is handled, stored, and protected, including whether drone systems connect to broader company networks and what mobile devices are used to operate them. The letters also seek records of any cybersecurity audits, internal testing, incident reports, and waivers requested to keep Chinese-made drones in use, as well as copies of company policies governing data retention, compliance with federal acquisition rules, and responses to potential security anomalies.
Why DJI drone technology worries US lawmakers
The letters lean heavily on a January 2024 joint bulletin from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and the FBI, which outlined three core concerns with Chinese-manufactured drones: data collection and transfer, firmware updates that could introduce unknown capabilities, and network-connected systems that could expose broader datasets.
Those risks exist across the drone industry, the bulletin noted, but are especially concerning with Chinese companies due to laws that require firms to cooperate with state intelligence services. Lawmakers say that combination makes DJI drones uniquely problematic when used around critical infrastructure.
DJI, for its part, has long disputed these claims. The company has pointed to third-party audits and security assessments that it says show no evidence of unauthorized data transmission. DJI has also argued that broad bans harm US industries that depend on affordable, capable drone technology, right from construction and agriculture to public safety.
DroneDJ readers know that federal scrutiny of DJI isn’t new. Since 2017, US agencies have been raising alarms about Chinese drones. Congress banned the Department of Defense from purchasing them in 2019. DJI was added to the Commerce Department’s Entity List in 2020. A 2021 executive order discouraged all federal agencies from buying drones made by foreign adversaries. In 2022, DJI was designated a Chinese military company, triggering additional contracting restrictions.
More recently, the General Services Administration tightened acquisition rules, and Congress mandated a security review that could determine whether DJI devices remain legal to sell in the US market. If that review isn’t completed by tomorrow, DJI could face an effective import ban.
What’s new is how lawmakers are enforcing these policies. Rather than relying solely on agencies to police compliance, senators are now demanding contract-by-contract disclosures, lists of drone models, data storage practices, cybersecurity policies, and records of any waivers sought to keep DJI equipment in use.
Why contractors are suddenly in the spotlight
Construction firms were early adopters of drones, and DJI dominated that market. Lawmakers appear increasingly concerned that legacy reliance on DJI systems may persist even as regulations tighten. Inspector General reports have already flagged instances of DJI drones being used at border facilities as recently as 2025.
By calling out individual companies, Congress is signaling that compliance isn’t optional, and that ignorance won’t be an acceptable defense. Contractors now face the prospect of congressional oversight, reputational risk, and potential contract consequences if they can’t clearly demonstrate adherence to federal drone rules.
This latest move underscores how the DJI debate in the US is evolving. It’s no longer just about whether DJI drones should be banned. It’s about who is still using them, where, and why, and whether American companies are taking national security warnings seriously enough.
As the pressure shifts downstream from manufacturers to users, the message from Capitol Hill is unmistakable: the DJI drone fight isn’t cooling off; it’s entering a more personal, more targeted phase.
More: Why DJI Mini 3 might be the smartest last-minute Christmas gift
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Comments