1. United States
2. Maine
3. Letter

I am writing as a concerned constituent to urge Congress to take seriously the emerging risks posed by large‑scale humanoid and general‑purpose robot programs, particularly those led by Elon Musk and his companies. Recent developments in robotics suggest that we are not just talking about isolated gadgets, but about the potential for a de facto private “army” of networked, mobile, physically capable machines under the control of a single corporate ecosystem. Humanoid robots and advanced mobile robots are now being developed and prepared for use in factories, warehouses, and eventually homes and public spaces. Analysts and safety experts have already raised concerns that such platforms create a significant new attack surface for hackers, since network‑connected robots can be remotely accessed and repurposed if security is inadequate. If a robot can move, lift, or manipulate tools, a security breach is no longer just a data problem; it can translate directly into physical harm, property damage, or targeted harassment in the real world. In addition, safety researchers point out that functional safety standards for humanoid robots are still immature and are struggling to keep pace with the speed of deployment that companies like Musk’s envision. These machines may operate in close proximity to workers, customers, and vulnerable individuals, yet the legal and technical frameworks that govern industrial robots in fenced‑off factory cells do not adequately address the risks of free‑moving, general‑purpose robots in mixed environments. A single company driving rapid rollout of such systems, with minimal external oversight, magnifies the danger. There is also the risk of deliberate misuse by legitimate owners and operators. Robots capable of independent navigation and manipulation can be directed to carry out actions that harm or intimidate others, assist in crimes, or conduct pervasive surveillance. When the hardware, software, and cloud infrastructure are all vertically integrated under one corporate and leadership structure, this concentration of power resembles, in practical terms, a privately controlled force with reach into workplaces, homes, and streets. Even if Musk’s intentions are benign, the combination of physical capability, connectivity, and centralized control should not be left entirely to corporate discretion. Policymakers are already warning that large‑scale automation and AI, strongly driven by powerful tech figures, amount to a “war against workers” and can deepen economic and political inequality if left unchecked. The same underlying dynamic applies to large fleets of robots: they can displace labor, expand corporate control over physical environments, and potentially be used in ways that chill protest or labor organizing, even without overt weaponization. When the most aggressive push in this direction is closely associated with a single high‑profile billionaire, it becomes a matter of democratic oversight, not just market competition. For these reasons, I respectfully request that you pursue or support legislation and hearings that would: • Establish clear federal safety and security standards for humanoid and general‑purpose robots, including requirements for physical safety limits, emergency‑stop mechanisms, and third‑party safety certification before large‑scale deployment. • Mandate robust cybersecurity and audit obligations for any network‑connected robot platform, including disclosure of security incidents, protections for AI models against adversarial attacks, and independent red‑teaming of safety‑critical systems. • Require transparency from large robotics developers regarding the scale, locations, and purposes of robot deployments, with special scrutiny when deployments are controlled or heavily influenced by a single individual or closely held group. • Clarify liability so that manufacturers and operators are held responsible when design flaws, lax security, or reckless deployment decisions lead to harm. Congress has an opportunity—and, I would argue, an obligation—to ensure that powerful robotics platforms do not evolve into private, unregulated forces that can be used to harm people, undermine workers, or intimidate communities. I urge you to act proactively, while this technology is still in its relative infancy, rather than waiting for a high‑profile disaster to expose gaps in our laws.