Policy
Bipartisan Bill Would Ban Chinese Robots From U.S. Agencies
Senators Tom Cotton (R-AR) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) introduced the American Security Robotics Act on March 26, 2026 — a bipartisan bill prohibiting federal agencies from purchasing or operating humanoid robots made by Chinese companies. The legislation arrived eight days after Congress held its first national security hearing on Chinese humanoid robots, and follows the same template as the 2023 DJI drone procurement ban.
On March 26, 2026, Senators Tom Cotton (R-AR) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) introduced the American Security Robotics Act — a bipartisan bill that would prohibit federal agencies from purchasing, operating, or using federal funds to acquire humanoid robots and unmanned ground vehicles manufactured by companies from adversarial nations, primarily China.
The bill arrived eight days after the first congressional hearing on Chinese robotics and national security. Where the March 18 testimony established the concern, this legislation puts binding restrictions on the table. A companion bill in the House is being introduced by Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY).
AI-generated image
The American Security Robotics Act represents Congress's most direct legislative response to Chinese dominance in humanoid robot manufacturing.
Key Stats
2
Senate Sponsors (bipartisan)
8 days
After First Congressional Hearing
100%
Federal Procurement Ban (if passed)
3
Bill Sponsors (Senate + House)
From Hearing Room to Legislation: Eight Days That Moved Fast
The pace here is worth noting. On March 18, the House Homeland Security subcommittee heard testimony from Scale AI and Boston Dynamics executives warning that Chinese humanoid robot manufacturers posed a national security risk. The key concerns: data exfiltration through onboard cameras and sensors, the possibility of remote access or shutdown by foreign operators, and the lack of any supply chain transparency requirements under current procurement rules.
Eight days later, two of the Senate's most prominent figures on opposite sides of the aisle announced joint legislation. That timeline, for Washington, is rapid. It suggests pre-existing agreement on the underlying threat model and a political environment where restrictions on Chinese technology carry broad enough support to move quickly.
Sen. Cotton's framing was direct: "Robots made by Communist China threaten Arkansans' privacy and our national security. Our bill will ban the federal government from buying and operating these devices made in countries that wish us harm."
Sen. Schumer framed it as a continuation of the pattern Congress has already addressed in drones (DJI) and telecom (Huawei, ZTE): "The Chinese Communist Party is running their standard playbook — this time in robotics — trying to flood the U.S. market with their technology, which presents real security risks."
The DJI Parallel
This bill follows the same template as the American Security Drone Act, which banned federal agencies from purchasing DJI drones in 2023. That legislation started in Defense appropriations, spread to all federal procurement, and eventually influenced private sector purchasing decisions as federal contractors followed suit. Industry analysts expect the same trajectory here if the American Security Robotics Act passes.
Under the Hood: What the Bill Actually Prohibits
The bill's scope covers federal agencies only — not private companies, universities, or state governments. It would prohibit three things: purchasing humanoid robots or unmanned ground vehicles from "foreign entities of concern" (defined to include Chinese companies with CCP ties), operating robots already purchased under similar conditions, and using any federal funds — including grants to universities or contractors — to acquire covered hardware.
The definition of "foreign entity of concern" tracks existing law used in the CHIPS Act and the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act. In practice, it captures companies domiciled in China, companies with Chinese state ownership above a threshold, and companies on the Defense Department's list of Chinese military companies.
AI-generated image
Congressional testimony highlighted sensor arrays and wireless connectivity in Chinese-made robots as vectors for data collection and potential remote access. Image: AI-generated illustration.
Who Gets Covered
The bill's most direct targets in the humanoid space are Chinese companies currently selling or marketing robots in the U.S. market:
| Company | Country | Key Robot | U.S. Presence | Bill Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unitree Robotics | China | G1, H1, R1 Air | Active sales, university labs | Covered |
| UBTECH Robotics | China | Walker X, Walker S | Limited commercial sales | Covered |
| AgiBot | China | X2 | Emerging U.S. market interest | Covered |
| FOURIER | China | GR-2 | Research/rehab partnerships | Covered |
| Figure AI | USA | Figure 03 | BMW, White House appearance | Not Covered |
| Boston Dynamics | USA (Hyundai) | Atlas | Commercial deployment, Hyundai factories | Not Covered |
| Agility Robotics | USA | Digit | Amazon, GXO deployments | Not Covered |
| Tesla | USA | Optimus Gen 3 | Internal Fremont deployment | Not Covered |
The Exemptions
The bill includes a research exemption for the U.S. military and law enforcement: they can study Chinese-made robots under restricted conditions provided there is no data transmission back to China. This mirrors exemptions in drone security legislation that allow DHS and the Pentagon to purchase adversarial drones for counter-UAS testing and vulnerability research.
What the Bill Does NOT Do
• Private sector: No restrictions on companies, universities, or individuals buying Chinese robots.
• State governments: Not covered unless they receive federal funds for the specific purchase.
• Existing inventory: Agencies already operating covered robots would need to phase them out — timeline not yet specified in the bill text.
• Tariffs: This is a procurement ban, not a trade restriction. Chinese robots can still be imported and sold commercially.
Who's Behind This and Who's Watching
The Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) issued a statement supporting the bill on the day of introduction, calling it "a critical step toward ensuring U.S. robotics supply chains remain secure." AUVSI has been the primary industry voice pushing for drone and ground vehicle security legislation since 2019.
American humanoid robot companies are the obvious commercial beneficiaries. The federal market for robotics is still small compared to the private sector, but federal procurement signals have outsized influence: they create contract vehicles, establish security standards, and shape what enterprise IT and operations teams consider acceptable. A federal ban on Chinese humanoid robots would almost certainly accelerate similar purchasing policies at defense contractors, intelligence community suppliers, and federally funded research universities.
For Unitree Robotics specifically, the timing is awkward. The company filed for a $610 million Shanghai IPO on March 20 — six days before this bill was introduced — citing strong U.S. market interest as part of its growth narrative. A federal procurement ban won't affect Unitree's existing university and research lab customers, but it closes one potential channel for government-adjacent sales and adds regulatory risk language to what was supposed to be a clean IPO story.
🇺🇸 U.S. Industry: Tailwind
American humanoid companies gain a protected federal market. More importantly, the legislation signals that government purchasers — at all levels — need to think about supply chain security. Companies like Figure, Agility, and Boston Dynamics are positioned as compliant alternatives by default.
🇨🇳 Chinese Robotics: Limited Near-Term Impact
The federal government is not yet a meaningful buyer of humanoid robots. The real risk is precedent: if this bill passes and federal contractor procurement follows (as it did with DJI drones), the addressable market for Chinese humanoid companies in the U.S. could shrink significantly by 2027-2028.
What This Means for the Robotics Industry
AI-generated image
Industrial automation deployments are a growing market for humanoid robots. Regulatory clarity on supply chain security is becoming a procurement factor alongside performance specs. Image: AI-generated illustration.
The bill's deeper significance is timing. Humanoid robots are not yet deployed at scale in federal facilities. There are no TSA robots doing baggage handling, no USPS distribution bots from Chinese suppliers, no NIH lab assistants running on Unitree G1 platforms. The legislation is getting ahead of the deployment curve — which is exactly what Congress failed to do with telecommunications infrastructure (Huawei) and drone procurement (DJI).
The DJI case is instructive. By the time Congress acted on DJI drones in 2023, thousands of units were already operating in federal, state, and local government contexts. The phase-out required years of transition spending and left operational gaps at agencies that had built workflows around DJI hardware. Starting the restriction before deployment is embedded makes the regulatory pathway far cleaner.
There's a secondary effect worth tracking: standards development. Once a procurement ban exists, agencies and standards bodies like NIST need criteria for what "not covered" looks like — supply chain provenance, software audit requirements, network isolation standards. Those criteria, once written, become de facto industry standards. American companies that help write them gain structural advantages in government procurement for years afterward.
The Research Lab Question
One area the bill doesn't fully resolve: federally funded university research. Labs at MIT, Carnegie Mellon, Berkeley, and Georgia Tech have purchased Unitree robots for locomotion and manipulation research using NSF, DARPA, and DOD grants. The bill's language on "federal funds" could create compliance questions for research institutions that have been using these platforms for years. Expect clarifying guidance or amendments as the bill moves through committee.
What's Coming Next
The bill has strong bipartisan momentum: Cotton's backing brings Republican Conference leadership, Schumer's backing brings Senate Democratic leadership, and the House companion from Stefanik adds cross-chamber reach. For comparison, the American Security Drone Act moved from introduction to inclusion in a defense authorization bill in under 18 months.
The most likely near-term path is inclusion in the FY2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which gets debated through mid-2026. The NDAA is where most technology security legislation finds its first binding vehicle — it passed the DJI ban, Huawei restrictions, and CHIPS Act precursors through the same route.
Watch for: committee markup in Senate Armed Services or Commerce (likely late April-May), potential additions broadening scope to state/local governments receiving federal homeland security grants, and industry testimony from Chinese robotics companies' U.S. distribution partners about economic impact.
Apr–May
Expected Committee Markup
FY2027
Likely NDAA Vehicle
18 mo.
Drone Bill Precedent (Intro to Law)
Frequently Asked Questions
Does the American Security Robotics Act ban all Chinese robots in the U.S.?
No. The bill only restricts federal government procurement and operations. Private companies, universities, and individuals can still purchase and operate Chinese-made humanoid robots. State and local governments are generally not covered unless federal funds are specifically used for the robot purchase. The bill is a procurement restriction, not a trade ban or import prohibition.
Which Chinese robot companies are affected?
Any company that qualifies as a "foreign entity of concern" under existing law — which covers companies domiciled in China, companies with Chinese state or military ownership above certain thresholds, and companies already listed on the Defense Department's Chinese military company list. In humanoid robotics, this includes Unitree Robotics, UBTECH, AgiBot, and FOURIER, among others.
Why is this bill bipartisan when most China-tech legislation is partisan?
Restricting Chinese technology access to U.S. government systems has strong support on both sides of the aisle. The Huawei telecom ban (2020) and DJI drone restrictions (2023) both passed with bipartisan majorities. Cotton and Schumer represent the same alignment that produced the CHIPS Act in 2022 — economic competition with China is one of the few issues where Senate Republican and Democratic leadership find consistent common ground.
How would this affect research universities using Unitree or UBTECH robots?
This is the bill's biggest open question. Labs at MIT, CMU, Berkeley, and other research universities have bought Unitree G1 and H1 units for locomotion research, often with NSF, DARPA, or DOD funding. The bill's prohibition on using "federal funds" for covered hardware could create retroactive compliance issues or require universities to seek waivers for existing research deployments. Expect clarifying amendments or agency guidance as the bill moves through committee.
Is there a precedent for this kind of legislation working?
Yes, with caveats. The DJI drone ban in 2023 successfully removed Chinese drones from most federal procurement, and federal contractor pressure further reduced their presence in sensitive work environments. However, DJI maintained its private sector market share and global leadership. A similar outcome is probable here: Chinese humanoid companies may be blocked from U.S. government use but remain competitive in industrial and consumer markets where security standards are lower. The legislation changes market structure, not market outcome.
The 12-Month Outlook
The American Security Robotics Act is an early-stage bill with genuine momentum. The bipartisan Senate sponsorship, the House companion, and the AUVSI endorsement give it a clearer path than most tech security legislation. The most probable landing zone is the FY2027 NDAA, which gets debated through mid-2026 — meaning the bill could become law before the year is out.
For the robotics industry, the practical implications extend beyond the federal market. When the government draws a security perimeter around a technology category, every enterprise buyer in a government-adjacent space starts asking the same questions about their own procurement. The drone precedent suggests this could reshape purchasing decisions across defense contractors, national labs, and federally funded research institutions within 12 to 18 months of passage.
The Bottom Line: Congress is treating humanoid robots like it treated drones and telecom equipment — a security perimeter is being drawn before deployment becomes entrenched, and American companies are positioned to fill the gap once it is.
The timeline to watch: Senate Armed Services or Commerce committee markup (likely April-May), any NDAA inclusion, and whether the bill's language on federal-grant-funded university research gets cleaned up before passage. The broader competition question — whether U.S. companies can actually outpace Chinese humanoid manufacturers in capability and cost — remains separate from the legal restrictions and won't be resolved by legislation alone.