Congress Introduces GUARD Act, Extending FCC Covered List Framework to Robotics

Proposed legislation would require national security review of certain foreign-made humanoid and quadruped robots

A bipartisan group of lawmakers has introduced legislation that would apply a familiar national security review process to humanoid and quadruped robots, signaling a broader U.S. approach to evaluating connected autonomous systems.

The Guarding the U.S. against Adversarial Robotics Dominance (GUARD) Act of 2026 was introduced by Representatives John Moolenaar (R-MI), Jay Obernolte (R-CA), and Jennifer McClellan (D-VA). The bill would require federal national security agencies to evaluate certain robotics communications equipment and services produced by entities connected to countries of concern. Products determined to pose an unacceptable national security risk would be added to the Federal Communications Commission’s Covered List. If no determination is made within one year, the products would be automatically added to the list.

The proposal focuses on humanoid and quadruped robots, as well as software and communications systems used to control them.

Applying a Familiar Framework

For drone industry observers, the legislative approach may sound familiar.

The FCC Covered List was originally developed to address communications equipment considered to pose national security risks. Over time, it has become a key mechanism in broader debates surrounding telecommunications equipment, surveillance systems, and more recently, foreign-manufactured drones.

The GUARD Act would extend that same framework to a new category of autonomous systems.

Under the bill, robots produced by entities headquartered in, controlled by, or affiliated with organizations in countries of concern would be subject to review. The legislation also applies to subsidiaries, joint ventures, and companies involved in technology-sharing or licensing agreements with covered entities.

Supporters of the legislation argue that robotics systems present growing national security concerns because they collect sensor data, operate autonomously, and rely on networked communications systems.

A Broader Shift in Technology Policy

The proposal reflects a larger trend in U.S. technology policy. Increasingly, policymakers are evaluating connected technologies through the lens of supply chain resilience, strategic dependency, and critical infrastructure security.

That shift has been particularly visible in the drone industry.

In recent years, policy discussions have evolved beyond questions of individual platform security. Policymakers have increasingly focused on broader issues such as manufacturing capacity, access to critical components, and dependence on foreign supply chains for technologies viewed as strategically important.

The same themes appear throughout the discussion surrounding the GUARD Act.

The legislation has received support from organizations including AUVSI, Agility Robotics, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, Hudson Institute, and the Bull Moose Project. Supporters argue that establishing a review process now could help address potential risks before robotics systems become more deeply integrated into critical sectors of the U.S. economy.

Drones and Ground Robots Converging

The legislation may also be notable because the distinction between aerial and ground-based autonomous systems continues to narrow.

Many industries already deploy drones and robotic ground systems together for inspection, security, logistics, public safety, and defense applications. Advances in artificial intelligence, autonomy, sensors, and communications networks increasingly allow different types of autonomous platforms to operate as part of a single system.

As a result, lawmakers appear to be viewing drones, robots, and other connected autonomous technologies as part of a broader ecosystem rather than as separate categories.

For the drone industry, the GUARD Act may offer another indication of how future policy discussions could develop. As autonomous systems become more common across commercial and government applications, regulatory attention is increasingly focused not only on what these systems can do, but also on where they are built, who controls their technology, and how their communications infrastructure is secured.

Read more:

• DJI Releases Independent Security Assessment as FCC Covered List Debate Continues
• Heritage Foundation Says US Probably Couldn’t Win a Drone War with China: Here’s Why.
• Drone Dominance: The Defense Department’s Push to Build a Scalable U.S. Drone Supply Chain