The GUARD Act and companion Senate measure aim to block Chinese-made humanoid and quadruped robots from U.S. markets by subjecting them to national security review, with lawmakers warning of espionage, supply-chain dominance, and military-civil fusion risks tied to firms like Unitree.
Unitree robots are already being sold in the United States, and several members of Congress say that is a problem. Lawmakers point to connections between some Chinese manufacturers and the People’s Liberation Army under Beijing’s military-civil fusion strategy, arguing those ties can feed technology and revenue into weapons programs. The concern is not hypothetical: firms heavily subsidized by the Chinese state can undercut U.S. competitors and entrench foreign hardware across critical sectors.
House China Committee Chairman John Moolenaar introduced the Guarding the U.S. Against Adversarial Robotics Dominance Act, known as the GUARD Act, to force a formal national security review of humanoid and quadruped robots made by China and other foreign adversaries. The bill would require agencies to assess whether specific products pose a risk, and products deemed dangerous would be added to the Federal Communications Commission’s Covered List and banned from sale. Anything not reviewed within the statutory deadline would be automatically treated as covered, a provision meant to close loopholes and speed enforcement.
“Robots made by China are a threat to national security, critical infrastructure, and American workers. They contain backdoors that can be hijacked for espionage, and our legislation will stop these threats now before China can embed them throughout America,” Moolenaar said.
Senator Tom Cotton introduced companion legislation in the Senate, the American Security Robotics Act, which would bar federal agencies from buying or operating unmanned Chinese robotic systems. Together, the twin bills aim to shore up both public procurement rules and civilian market protections so state-linked foreign firms cannot win institutional footholds. Sponsors frame the measures as a defensive step to keep sensitive locations from being populated with remotely accessible or repurposed foreign hardware.
Members of the House China Committee previously sent a bipartisan letter pressing federal agencies to scrutinize Unitree and consider placing it on Pentagon and Commerce Department watchlists. That letter reflected a broader worry that certain Chinese robotics companies, by design or obligation under national policy, can be channels to military capability. Congress has dealt with similar threats before in telecoms, citing Huawei and ZTE as precedents where decisive action prevented deeper U.S. dependence on adversary-controlled infrastructure.
Industry voices have responded to the legislation by stressing supply chain resilience and domestic manufacturing. Peggy Johnson, CEO of Agility Robotics, said the measures “send an important market signal as U.S. robotics companies continue investing in resilient supply chains, domestic manufacturing capabilities, and trusted technologies.” Advocacy groups and trade associations warn that without policy intervention, heavy state-backed pricing and scale could push American firms out of key markets and leave the country dependent on potentially exploitable equipment.
“The GUARD Act is a commonsense step towards protecting our national security, supporting American robotics companies, and ensuring the United States leads in the next generation of trusted robotics technology,” said Rep. Jay Obernolte.
Michael Robbins, president and CEO of AUVSI, argues robotics are rapidly integrating into American industry and infrastructure, and that makes preventive rules urgent. He warns of “high-risk Chinese Communist Party-controlled systems” that might expose data, create persistent access, or enable remote disruption. The GUARD Act is pitched as a framework to spot and restrict such systems before long-term strategic dependence forms.
Critics of unrestricted imports point to the practical difficulty of removing embedded foreign hardware once it is widely adopted in warehouses, hospitals, schools, and homes. The longer such devices circulate, the tougher and costlier it becomes to unwind their presence. Supporters of stronger review powers say decisive action now avoids a later scenario where politics, budgets, and logistics all make restriction impossible.
Congressional action on this issue reflects a growing consensus that advanced robotics are not just commercial devices but strategic tools that can affect national security and industrial strength. The proposed rules seek to combine review timelines, procurement bans, and market signals so that trusted, domestically accountable technologies lead the next generation of robotics deployments in the United States.
Add comment