Coastal Drone Surveillance and Interdiction Assessment Act

Bill Number

H.R. 2775

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Immigration

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2025-04-09: Referred to the Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement.

Last Updated

2025-05-19T15:09:17Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

The legislation, titled the Coastal Drone Surveillance and Interdiction Assessment Act, aims to evaluate the use of drones (unmanned aerial vehicles) to enhance security along the U.S. coastline. It focuses on strengthening border protection and interrupting drug smuggling operations that occur at sea or at low altitudes, particularly in challenging areas.

Key Provisions

• Assessment Requirement: The Secretary of Homeland Security must conduct and submit a detailed report to Congress within 180 days (about six months) of the bill's enactment.
• Scope of the Assessment: The report will examine the effectiveness, risks, and potential benefits of deploying drones for:
• Improving overall border security.
• Disrupting drug smuggling via maritime routes or low-altitude flights.
• Focus Areas: Emphasis on major drug trafficking routes across the U.S. and on remote, isolated, or difficult-to-access coastal communities (e.g., islands or rugged shorelines).
• Consultation Process: The Secretary will work with leaders of other relevant federal agencies (as determined necessary) to prepare the report.
• Submission Targets: The report goes to the House Committee on Homeland Security and the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

This bill introduces a new mandate for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to perform a specific evaluation on drone technology for coastal security. It does not amend prior laws directly but adds a one-time assessment obligation, which could inform future policy or funding decisions on border enforcement tools. No existing drone programs are altered; this is primarily an informational and planning step.

Potential Impacts

• On Government Agencies: DHS will need to allocate resources (time, staff, and possibly expertise from other agencies) to complete the assessment, potentially leading to recommendations for expanded drone use in border patrols. This could streamline operations for agencies like U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) by identifying efficient surveillance methods.
• On Citizens: Coastal residents, especially in remote areas, may benefit from improved detection of smuggling activities, reducing risks from illegal drugs entering communities. However, increased drone surveillance could raise privacy concerns for everyday activities near borders.
• On International Relations: Enhanced coastal interdiction could pressure foreign drug trafficking networks (e.g., from Mexico or other regions), potentially improving cooperation with neighboring countries on anti-smuggling efforts, but it might also strain relations if perceived as overly aggressive monitoring.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• Federal Government: Primarily DHS and its sub-agencies (e.g., CBP and Coast Guard), along with other consulted federal entities involved in border or drug enforcement.
• Congressional Committees: The House and Senate homeland security committees, which will receive and review the assessment to guide future legislation or budgets.
• Coastal Communities: Residents and local governments in high-risk areas, who could see direct benefits or disruptions from any resulting drone deployments.
• Law Enforcement and Security Personnel: Border agents and anti-drug task forces, who may gain new tools for operations.
• Drug Trafficking Organizations: Indirectly affected through potential disruptions to their low-altitude or maritime smuggling routes.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal Implications: The bill ensures congressional oversight of emerging technologies like drones in security contexts, promoting evidence-based decisions. It complies with standard federal reporting requirements but could lead to future regulations on drone privacy or operational limits if risks (e.g., data collection) are highlighted in the assessment.
• Constitutional Implications: While the bill itself is neutral, drone surveillance raises potential Fourth Amendment concerns (protection against unreasonable searches), as expanded use might involve monitoring without warrants. The assessment's focus on risks could address these by recommending safeguards.
• Political Implications: As a bipartisan border security measure (introduced in a Republican-led Congress), it underscores ongoing political priorities around immigration and drug control. It avoids mandating action, keeping it low-controversy, but the report could fuel debates on technology funding versus civil liberties.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rescom. Hernández, Pablo [D-PR-At Large]

Recent Actions

• 2025-04-09: Referred to the Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement.
• 2025-04-09: Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security.
• 2025-04-09: Introduced in House
• 2025-04-09: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• Coastal Drone Surveillance and Interdiction Assessment Act — issued 2025-04-09 — PDF (2 pages)