Huawei Technologies – the world’s largest manufacturer of telecommunications equipment and a major smartphone brand – has attracted considerable controversy in recent years.

Cyber-security chiefs have warned about the risks of using Huawei-made telecommunications equipment (Chinese companies are required by law to cooperate with intelligence efforts), resulting in several US allies shutting Huawei out of its next-generation telecommunications infrastructure.

In December 2018, Huawei’s CFO was arrested in Canada at the request of US authorities and in January this year, US prosecutors revealed 23 criminal indictments against the company, its executives and its subsidiaries, including trade theft, bank fraud and violation of trade sanctions against Iran.

The company has consistently hit back at attacks from the US and its allies, denying that it assists Beijing with state surveillance and rejecting the criminal charges brought against it.

Now, the company has filed a lawsuit against the US government in the US District Court in the Eastern District of Texas, arguing that a law limiting its business in the country is unconstitutional. Last year, US President Donald Trump signed a law (the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019), which included a clause forbidding federal agencies from acquiring equipment from Huawei and other Chinese vendors. The move was another hostile blow in the ongoing US-China trade war, which in 2018 involved the introduction of hundreds of billions of dollars of tariffs on each other’s goods.

Huawei has argued that the US restrictions on Huawei products are baseless. “The US Congress has repeatedly failed to produce any evidence to support its restrictions on Huawei products. We are compelled to take this legal action as a proper and last resort,” said current Huawei chair Guo Ping, speaking at a special press conference to announce the legal action. “This ban is not only unlawful, but also restricts Huawei from engaging in fair competition, ultimately harming US consumers. We look forward to the court’s verdict.”

“The US government is sparing no effort to smear the company and mislead the public,” Guo added.

The law restricting Huawei’s business in the US is unconstitutional because it could severely limit the company’s ability to do business in the US despite “no proof” of wrongdoing, the company states. Huawei restates in its lawsuit that its equipment and services have no backdoors, implants or other intentional security vulnerabilities, arguing that more than 170 other countries have endorsed its products.

John Suffolk, Huawei’s global cyber security and privacy officer said at the conference that the company could not claim to produce “perfect code” or execute every process correctly for the first time, but that it would “continue to make multi-billion dollar investments into our R&D and our security.”

Huawei has also argued that it has been denied due process and that Congress has violated the constitutional separation of powers by doing the work of courts in blocking Huawei’s dealings in the US. It argues that the actions of the US government have restricted its ability to compete in 5G infrastructure bids around the world.

Speaking at the conference, Guo also accused the US government of hacking Huawei’s servers and stealing its emails and source code. No further details have been provided with regards to these claims, although a 2014 New York Times report based on documents unearthed by Edward Snowden claimed that the US National Security Agency hacked equipment at Huawei’s headquarters to monitor communications.

“Huawei is showing that it will not roll over on the US full-court press,” Paul Triolo, a global tech issues expert at Eurasia Group, told CNN. “It is not likely to result in Huawei gaining new access to the US market, but it is a symbolic marker that could influence other players around the world considering potential limitations or bans against the firm.”

Commentators have been quick to compare the lawsuit to a similar lawsuit filed by Russian cyber-security company Kaspersky Lab over a ban on federal agencies using its security services. Kaspersky’s legal action was unsuccessful, meaning that Huawei will need to differentiate itself from that case in order to proceed with its challenge.

Huawei chief legal officer Song Liuping said that the two cases were distinct in terms of evidence and scope and that Huawei’s legal case had “full merits”.

Huawei Technologies – the world’s largest manufacturer of telecommunications equipment and a major smartphone brand – has attracted considerable controversy in recent years.

Cyber-security chiefs have warned about the risks of using Huawei-made telecommunications equipment (Chinese companies are required by law to cooperate with intelligence efforts), resulting in several US allies shutting Huawei out of its next-generation telecommunications infrastructure.

In December 2018, Huawei’s CFO was arrested in Canada at the request of US authorities and in January this year, US prosecutors revealed 23 criminal indictments against the company, its executives and its subsidiaries, including trade theft, bank fraud and violation of trade sanctions against Iran.

The company has consistently hit back at attacks from the US and its allies, denying that it assists Beijing with state surveillance and rejecting the criminal charges brought against it.

Now, the company has filed a lawsuit against the US government in the US District Court in the Eastern District of Texas, arguing that a law limiting its business in the country is unconstitutional. Last year, US President Donald Trump signed a law (the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019), which included a clause forbidding federal agencies from acquiring equipment from Huawei and other Chinese vendors. The move was another hostile blow in the ongoing US-China trade war, which in 2018 involved the introduction of hundreds of billions of dollars of tariffs on each other’s goods.

Huawei has argued that the US restrictions on Huawei products are baseless. “The US Congress has repeatedly failed to produce any evidence to support its restrictions on Huawei products. We are compelled to take this legal action as a proper and last resort,” said current Huawei chair Guo Ping, speaking at a special press conference to announce the legal action. “This ban is not only unlawful, but also restricts Huawei from engaging in fair competition, ultimately harming US consumers. We look forward to the court’s verdict.”

“The US government is sparing no effort to smear the company and mislead the public,” Guo added.

The law restricting Huawei’s business in the US is unconstitutional because it could severely limit the company’s ability to do business in the US despite “no proof” of wrongdoing, the company states. Huawei restates in its lawsuit that its equipment and services have no backdoors, implants or other intentional security vulnerabilities, arguing that more than 170 other countries have endorsed its products.

John Suffolk, Huawei’s global cyber security and privacy officer said at the conference that the company could not claim to produce “perfect code” or execute every process correctly for the first time, but that it would “continue to make multi-billion dollar investments into our R&D and our security.”

Huawei has also argued that it has been denied due process and that Congress has violated the constitutional separation of powers by doing the work of courts in blocking Huawei’s dealings in the US. It argues that the actions of the US government have restricted its ability to compete in 5G infrastructure bids around the world.

Speaking at the conference, Guo also accused the US government of hacking Huawei’s servers and stealing its emails and source code. No further details have been provided with regards to these claims, although a 2014 New York Times report based on documents unearthed by Edward Snowden claimed that the US National Security Agency hacked equipment at Huawei’s headquarters to monitor communications.

“Huawei is showing that it will not roll over on the US full-court press,” Paul Triolo, a global tech issues expert at Eurasia Group, told CNN. “It is not likely to result in Huawei gaining new access to the US market, but it is a symbolic marker that could influence other players around the world considering potential limitations or bans against the firm.”

Commentators have been quick to compare the lawsuit to a similar lawsuit filed by Russian cyber-security company Kaspersky Lab over a ban on federal agencies using its security services. Kaspersky’s legal action was unsuccessful, meaning that Huawei will need to differentiate itself from that case in order to proceed with its challenge.

Huawei chief legal officer Song Liuping said that the two cases were distinct in terms of evidence and scope and that Huawei’s legal case had “full merits”.