Huawei Technologies filed a motion in a United States court on Wednesday for a summary judgment on its lawsuit against the US government, which banned purchases of the Shenzhen-based company’s telecom equipment.
“The US government has provided no evidence to show that Huawei is a security threat,” said Song Liuping, Huawei’s chief legal officer. “There is no gun, no smoke. Only speculation.”
Huawei has asking the court to rule on whether it is constitutional for the US to implement a military spending provision that bars the government and its contractors from using Huawei equipment, Song said in a Shenzhen media briefing on Wednesday, citing a company statement.
The US government should halt its state-sanctioned campaign against Huawei because it will not deliver cybersecurity, he said, adding that banning Huawei using cybersecurity as an excuse “will do nothing to make networks more secure.”
“Politicians in the US are using the strength of an entire nation to come after a private company … They provide a false sense of security, and distract attention from the real challenges we face,” Song said.
In August 2018, in the 2019 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), the US Congress prohibited US government agencies from contracting with Huawei or with companies that use Huawei equipment. The US government accused Huawei of having a close alliance with the Chinese government and said its equipment could be used to spy on Americans. Huawei denies the allegation.
On March 6, Huawei filed a lawsuit in a federal court in Texas against the US government. It said when Congress called it out by name, that violated the Constitution’s Bill of Attainder clause, which prohibits Congress from singling out a company or individual for punishment without a trial.
On Wednesday, Huawei said in a complaint that Section 889 of the 2019 NDAA singled out Huawei by name and not only barred US government agencies from buying Huawei equipment and services, but also barred it from contracting with or awarding grants or loans to third parties who buy Huawei equipment or services – even if there is no impact or connection to the US government.
“The judicial system is the last line of defense for justice. Huawei has confidence in the independence and integrity of the US judicial system. We hope that mistakes in the NDAA can be corrected by the court,” Song added.
Glen Nager, Huawei’s lead counsel for the case, said Section 889 of the 2019 NDAA violates the Bill of Attainder, Due Process and Vesting clauses of the United States Constitution. The case is purely “a matter of law” as there are no facts at issue, thereby justifying the motion for a summary judgment to speed up the process, Nager said.
Huawei said it expects the US to take the right approach and adopt honest and effective measures to enhance cybersecurity for everyone, if the US government’s real goal is security.
A hearing on the motion is set for September 19.
On May 15, the US Commerce Department added Huawei to its Entity List on national security grounds. On May 21, it granted Huawei a license to buy US goods until August 19. The action raised concerns about whether Huawei may have to downsize its production because of a lack of chip supply and software support from US firms.
“This sets a dangerous precedent. Today it’s telecoms and Huawei. Tomorrow it could be your industry, your company, your consumers,” Song said in the media briefing.