House Measures Seek Pentagon Safeguards Against Chinese Robotics and Foreign Biotech Threats
WASHINGTON — Rep. Sheri Biggs, R-S.C., introduced three bills Oct. 22 concerning technology used by or affecting the Defense Department.
One bill would require the defense secretary to develop a strategy about threats posed by the biotechnology capabilities of foreign adversaries. A second would prohibit the department from acquiring or using certain robotic systems from the People’s Republic of China. A third would provide for an audit and mitigation of covered cellular modules in Defense Department systems and infrastructure. PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONSHouse · 2026-10-22View source
The proposals are bills, meaning they are proposed laws rather than laws now in effect. Each has been introduced and sent, or referred, to a House committee for possible consideration.
H.R. 10859, the Biotech Defense Act, was referred to the House Armed Services Committee and, for provisions within its jurisdiction, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. H.R. 10860, the Stop Beijing’s Bots Act, and H.R. 10861, the Blocking Foreign Cellular Modules in Defense Systems Act of 2026, were referred to Armed Services. Biotech Defense ActHR 10859 · REFERREDView source Stop Beijing’s Bots ActHR 10860 · REFERREDView source Blocking Foreign Cellular Modules in Defense Systems Act of 2026HR 10861 · REFERREDView source
The House records list Biggs as sponsor of all three bills. They list no cosponsors, votes or actions after the initial referrals. The measures therefore have not been enacted or advanced by committee. Biotech Defense ActHR 10859 · REFERREDView source Stop Beijing’s Bots ActHR 10860 · REFERREDView source Blocking Foreign Cellular Modules in Defense Systems Act of 2026HR 10861 · REFERREDView source
No bill-text versions are included in the legislative records reviewed. That means the available primary material does not establish which robotic systems or cellular modules would be covered, how the bills would define foreign adversaries, or whether they would set deadlines, funding, exceptions or enforcement rules.
Those unanswered details would shape the central policy question: whether the proposals could reduce national-security and supply-chain exposure without creating significant procurement effects involving cost, availability or compatibility with existing equipment. The primary records reviewed contain no statements from Biggs, the committees, the Defense Department, industry representatives, or civil-liberties or trade experts.