Huawei sues Federal Communications Commission for violating U.S. Constitution
Huawei filed an indictment in a U.S. court today, asking the court to find that the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) decision to bar Huawei from participating in federal subsidy funding programs violates the US Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act.
The FCC passed a decision on November 22 that identified Huawei as a national security threat and barred operators in rural areas of the United States from using the Universal Service Fund (USF) to purchase Huawei equipment. In the indictment filed with the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, Huawei believed that the FCC directly identified Huawei as a national security threat and did not give Huawei the opportunity to refute the allegations, which violated the principle of due process. Huawei also believes that the FCC has not provided any evidence or reasonable grounds to support its arbitrary decisions, which violates US laws such as the US Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act.
Song Liuping, Huawei's chief legal officer, said at the press conference, "Just because Huawei is a Chinese company, we are banned from us and cannot solve any network security problems."
He also added that FCC Chairman Ajit Pai and other members did not provide any evidence to support their allegations that Huawei was considered a security threat. Since the FCC first proposed this proposal in March 2018, Huawei and rural American operators have submitted multiple rounds of factual basis and objections, but the FCC has completely ignored these factual basis and opinions.
In a statement, Song Liuping said, "Huawei also submitted 21 rounds of detailed comments on the harm the decision made to users and businesses in remote areas. But the FCC ignored all these comments."
He also said, "Operators in rural areas in the United States, including small towns in Montana and Kentucky, and farms in Wyoming, chose to cooperate with Huawei because they recognize the quality and safety of Huawei equipment. FCC Huawei and carriers should not be barred from cooperating in providing connectivity services in rural areas of the United States. "
The lead lawyer of the case, Glen Nager, said that the FCC passed this decision, which was aimed only at Chinese companies such as Huawei, without complying with relevant standards, and the FCC itself admitted that it was targeting Chinese companies.
In addition, Glen Nager said that the rule goes beyond the FCC's statutory powers because the FCC does not have the power to make national security determinations or to restrict the use of USF funds based on that judgment. In addition, the FCC does not have professional recognition capabilities in national security.
Glen Nager also said that the decision made against Huawei lacked legal and factual basis. He stated: "The FCC did not make this judgment based on evidence, but based on a fundamental misreading of Chinese law and unreasonable, unreliable and unacceptable allegations and insinuations. The decision was purely an unreasonable and poor preliminary trial . "
Song Kai, vice president of Huawei's corporate communications department, said that the FCC's decision is not conducive to improving the level of connectivity in rural areas in the United States, because these areas rely on Huawei equipment to access the network, while other manufacturers are unwilling to operate in "very remote, difficult terrain conditions And sparsely populated "regions. He also said that the ban and the subsequent proposal to remove and replace Huawei equipment would bring additional costs of hundreds of millions of dollars and even cause some small operators to go bankrupt.
Editor-in-chief: Liu Jing