House Bill Would Ban Chinese-Made Drones from U.S. Law Enforcement and Tie Federal Grants to Domestic Sourcing by 2027

The Problem Harrigan Is Trying to Solve

Rep. Pat Harrigan, R-N.C., serves on key subcommittees of the House Armed Services Committee, and he is pushing legislation to remove Chinese-manufactured drones from American law enforcement agencies. His bill, the American Drone Manufacturing Dominance Act of 2026, was reported on by Fox News Digital.

"Here in the United States, we've allowed China to dominate much of the global drone market while American agencies continue relying on systems built by companies tied to the Chinese Communist Party," Harrigan said in a statement to Fox News Digital. "That's a strategic mistake."

Local law enforcement is heavily reliant on Chinese manufacturers like Da Jiang Innovations (DJI). In Texas alone, the FAA reported that of the 966 drones registered to police and sheriff's departments in the state in 2024, 879 were produced by DJI. Multiple U.S. defense and intelligence reports have flagged the data-collection risks of using CCP-linked hardware in sensitive government operations.

What the Bill Actually Does

The legislation has three main components, according to Fox News Digital's reporting.

First, it creates an off-ramp for law enforcement agencies currently using Chinese-made drones, giving them a structured path to transition rather than an immediate mandate to junk existing equipment.

Second, federal grant funding would be conditioned on not acquiring any foreign-made drones after January 1, 2027. That is a hard deadline tied to money, which is the most reliable mechanism Congress has to change purchasing behavior at the state and local level.

Third, the bill sets aside $1.5 billion to accelerate the removal of Chinese hardware and subsidize a domestic drone manufacturing base with defense applications. That funding would come through revenue from Trump's Section 301 tariffs on Chinese goods.

The Security Rationale

Harrigan pointed directly to the war in Ukraine as a proof of concept. "One of the clearest lessons from Ukraine is that drones are no longer a niche capability; they're a foundational part of modern warfare," he said.

The domestic concern is different but related. A drone in law enforcement hands, running software on servers with potential CCP access, creates an intelligence vulnerability.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection has expanded drone operations significantly for border surveillance, monitoring wide areas quickly. A 2020 internal memorandum from then-CBP Chief Rodney Scott signaled the agency's intent to significantly expand drone use. "These unmanned technologies will achieve levels of detection, response and interdiction efficiencies not realized by current CBP technological capabilities," the memorandum states. Running that border surveillance infrastructure on hardware with potential backdoors to Beijing is a genuine problem.

The Strongest Counterargument

Critics of this approach have a legitimate concern: government-funded domestic manufacturing programs have a poor historical track record of producing globally competitive industries at a reasonable cost to taxpayers.

The $1.5 billion subsidy mechanism is essentially industrial policy. The government picks a sector and pumps federal dollars into it. If local law enforcement agencies are forced to buy American hardware at significantly higher cost, that money comes out of other public safety budgets. Mandating purchases does not automatically produce a competitive industry; it can just as easily produce a protected, inefficient one.

The alternative is running sensitive government operations on hardware that a foreign adversary government can potentially access. At some point the security cost outweighs the procurement savings.

What Is Still Unknown

Fox News Digital's report does not include any response from drone industry groups, DJI, Democratic members of Congress, or the White House Office of Management and Budget on cost projections. Those voices would sharpen the picture considerably.

The bill's Jan. 1, 2027 grant-funding deadline is approaching. Whether domestic manufacturers can realistically scale production to meet law enforcement demand in that window is an open question that the legislation does not appear to address.

It is also unclear when Harrigan's bill would reach the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives for consideration, and no Senate companion bill is identified in Fox News Digital's reporting. Whether it advances before the current legislative session ends is unresolved.