A US federal judge has just delivered a big blow to DJI, ruling that the world’s top drone maker will remain on the Pentagon’s blacklist of companies tied to China’s military.
US District Judge Paul Friedman on Friday rejected DJI’s lawsuit against the US Department of Defense (DoD), which sought to remove the Shenzhen-based drone giant from the Pentagon’s official list of “Chinese military companies.” For the world’s largest drone manufacturer — and for thousands of American drone pilots — the decision is more than just legal paperwork. It’s about whether DJI drones, which dominate skies everywhere from construction sites to neighborhood parks, can keep flying freely in the US.
Pentagon blacklist: More than just a name
Let’s start with the basics. DJI was first placed on the Pentagon’s Section 1260H list back in 2022. That’s the US government’s running blacklist of companies allegedly linked to China’s military-industrial complex. The list isn’t an outright ban, but make no mistake — it packs a punch. Companies on it face serious roadblocks: lost government contracts, pressure on private partnerships, reputational damage, and a cloud of “national security threat” suspicion.
For DJI, a company that accounts for more than half of all drones sold in the US, the stigma has been brutal. Court documents show DJI argued it has “lost business deals, been stigmatized as a national security threat, and been banned from contracting with multiple federal agencies.” In other words, being on that list doesn’t just hurt their government sales. It ripples out to private companies that rely on federal work and don’t want the Pentagon side-eyeing their drone vendor.
New: DJI’s first 360 camera already has a huge discount
DJI’s argument: ‘We’re not military-owned’
DJI sued in October 2024, claiming the Defense Department’s decision was “unlawful and misguided.” The company has long insisted it is “neither owned nor controlled by the Chinese military.” In fact, DJI stressed that it doesn’t manufacture drones for combat, has policies against military use, and designs its products for commercial and consumer markets — the drones you see filming weddings, surveying rooftops, or monitoring crops.
DJI even pointed to what it saw as unfair treatment: companies like Volkswagen China or Nokia Bell also receive Chinese government subsidies and hold state designations, yet they weren’t blacklisted. “Why us and not them?” was essentially the message.
Judge Friedman didn’t buy DJI’s plea. His 49-page opinion lays out the reasoning. The central issue: DJI’s recognition as a “National Enterprise Technology Center” (NETC) by China’s powerful National Development and Reform Commission. That designation isn’t just a gold star. It comes with subsidies, special tax breaks, and financial support from multiple levels of government. To the judge, that amounted to “receiving assistance from the Chinese government” under Section 1260H.
In US law, that’s enough to make DJI a “military-civil fusion contributor” — a term that covers companies straddling civilian innovation and potential military use. And because DJI’s drones clearly have “substantial dual-use applications,” meaning they can serve civilian markets but also be adapted for battlefield surveillance or even modified to drop explosives, the court found it reasonable to call DJI part of China’s defense industrial base.
DJI countered that it doesn’t sell to militaries and that plenty of Western companies also receive government subsidies. But Friedman ruled that the Pentagon has broad discretion to decide who goes on the list and who doesn’t. In other words, the government can put Company X on the blacklist while leaving Company Y off, even if their situations look similar. That argument was a big blow to DJI’s case.
This just in: DJI expands its drone lineup with a stealthy new arrival
Interestingly, the court did reject some of the Pentagon’s weaker claims. For example, the DoD had tried to argue that DJI was indirectly owned by the Chinese Communist Party through a state-owned enterprise called Chengtong. The judge said nope; the evidence wasn’t strong enough. He also noted the Pentagon had confused two industrial development zones when trying to show DJI’s facilities were in a “military-civil fusion” hub. But those errors didn’t matter in the end. The NETC subsidies and DJI’s dual-use technology were enough to uphold the listing.
What this means for US drone pilots
So what does this ruling actually mean for the everyday drone pilot in the US? The short version: DJI drones aren’t banned — at least not yet. You can still buy a Air 3S for your real estate shoots, or send a Matrice into the sky for bridge inspections.
But the clouds are gathering. Placement on the list has already shut DJI out of US government contracts starting in 2026. Federal agencies from the DoD to Homeland Security are barred from using their products. And that stigma is powerful — many private companies are wary of relying on a vendor tagged as a national security threat. Beyond that, there are pending measures that could tighten restrictions further, like FCC license hurdles for new DJI products and a possible Commerce Department crackdown on drone imports.
For drone pilots, that raises some uncomfortable questions: What happens if a future ban limits DJI’s ability to sell or update drones in the US? What if spare parts or software updates get harder to access? We’ve already seen hints of this reality — flagship models like the Mini 5 Pro launched globally but never made it to US shelves, leaving pilots here to wonder whether future releases will skip the market altogether.
DJI isn’t throwing in the towel. In a statement, the company said it was “disappointed that the court nonetheless upheld the listing,” emphasizing that the decision rested on “a single rationale that applies to many companies that have never been listed.” DJI added that it is reviewing its legal options — which could include an appeal.
The company also struck a defiant tone: “DJI’s success is built on relentless innovation, and the market continues to choose our products for their reliability, safety, and accessibility. We remain committed to serving our US customers and partners, and we call for fair competition in the United States.”
The bigger picture: US-China tech wars
DJI’s legal fight is just one front in a much broader tech war between Washington and Beijing. In recent years, the US has slapped restrictions on Chinese companies across sectors: semiconductors, batteries, surveillance cameras, and more. Hesai Group, a LiDAR maker from Shanghai, also lost a nearly identical lawsuit against the Pentagon this summer. Others, like battery giant CATL, have threatened legal action. In that context, DJI’s ruling is another sign that Chinese companies face an uphill climb in US courts.
For American drone pilots, though, the worry is less about geopolitics and more about gear. DJI makes drones that are affordable, reliable, and unmatched in terms of features. US drone makers, by contrast, often cater to military or specialized public safety markets, not everyday pilots. If DJI products get squeezed out, pilots could be left with fewer choices and higher costs.
Friday’s court ruling keeps DJI on the Pentagon’s blacklist, deepening its US troubles. While the company vows to keep fighting, the decision shows just how firmly Washington views DJI as tied to China’s defense apparatus. For drone pilots, the takeaway is clear: DJI drones still work, still fly, and still dominate the market — but their long-term future in the US is anything but guaranteed.
More: This new FAA Part 108 rule could lock DJI pilots out of BVLOS
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. Facebook, and YouTube channel.
Comments