LANDED Act

Bill Number: H.R. 6042
Origin Chamber: House
Congress: 119th Congress, Session 1
Policy Area: Transportation and Public Works
Status: Introduced
Latest Action: 2025-11-13: Referred to the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence.
Last Updated: 2026-07-09T13:27:22Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose of the Legislation

The LANDED Act aims to improve coordination between state law enforcement and the federal government to detect, mitigate, and stop unauthorized drones (unmanned aircraft systems, or UAS) that pose threats to public safety, national security, or critical infrastructure. It establishes frameworks for technology use, reporting, grants, and oversight to address unlawful drone activities.

Key Provisions

Definitions (Section 2): Defines key terms, including "approved counter-UAS detection system" (devices to disable, disrupt, or seize control of drones safely and legally), "threats posed by a UAS" (unauthorized drone actions risking human life, public safety, national security sites, critical infrastructure, or severe economic damage), and "UAS" (drones plus control elements like communication links).

Counter-UAS Mitigation Law Enforcement Cooperation (Section 3):
Requires the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS), in coordination with the Attorney General (DOJ) and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Administrator, to create policies allowing state law enforcement to acquire, deploy, operate, and train with approved counter-drone systems.
Establishes an application process for state agencies to gain approval; upon approval, DHS enters agreements specifying equipment, response authorities, operational limits, safety conditions, site visits, and reporting.
Authorizes trained personnel to detect, track, warn operators, disrupt control, seize, confiscate, or use reasonable force to disable drones in credible threat situations.
Mandates coordination with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to avoid interfering with civilian communications (e.g., radio or cellular networks).
Requires case-by-case DHS approval for initial mitigations (first 180 days), 24-hour post-event reports, and revocation for non-compliance (e.g., privacy violations).
FAA assesses locations to ensure no interference with national airspace, including airports.

Mandatory Drone Deconfliction Reporting (Section 4):
DHS and FAA must create policies within 180 days to prevent conflicts among federal, state, and local agencies using drones.
Establishes a mandatory reporting system for non-emergency drone operations, including a database of transponder IDs, usage times, and a check mechanism to identify active agency drones.

Rapid Response (Section 5):
Allows DHS to quickly assist states in UAS emergencies, bypassing standard processes, with a defined response procedure.

Counter-UAS Security Grant Program (Section 6):
Creates a DHS program providing grants to state law enforcement and emergency agencies for counter-drone equipment, training fees, and related activities.
Funds usable for up to 24 months.

Review and Report on UAS Activity (Section 7):
Directs the Department of Defense (DoD) Inspector General to review foreign-linked drone threats over military sites, vessels, aircraft, and U.S. homeland.
Requires a report to multiple congressional committees within 90 days, covering UAS incidents, information-sharing gaps, counter-UAS deployment processes, DoD assistance to state/local agencies, and capabilities of major global rivals (e.g., "near-peer actors").
Report in unclassified form, with optional classified annex.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

Overrides federal restrictions in 49 U.S.C. § 46502 (prohibiting aircraft interference) and 18 U.S.C. §§ 32, 1030, 1367, plus Chapters 119 and 206 (covering sabotage, computer fraud, communications interference, and surveillance/wiretapping), to allow state law enforcement to intercept, disrupt, or seize drone communications without operator consent in threat scenarios.
Introduces new federal exceptions for state actions, previously limited to federal agencies, and mandates deconfliction reporting not required under prior drone regulations.
Builds on 49 U.S.C. § 44801 and Public Law 112-95 definitions but expands state roles in counter-UAS operations.

Potential Impacts

Government Agencies: Enhances federal-state coordination (DHS, FAA, DOJ, FCC, DoD), streamlines emergency responses, and provides funding via grants, potentially increasing workload for approvals, reports, and oversight. DoD gains review mandates on foreign threats.
Citizens: Improves protection from dangerous drones (e.g., near events or infrastructure), but could raise privacy risks from communications interception; focuses on threats to limit broad surveillance.
International Relations: The DoD report on foreign adversary drones (e.g., from rival nations) may inform U.S. policy on global drone proliferation, potentially straining ties with countries linked to such activities, though it emphasizes domestic security.

Main Stakeholders Affected

State and Local Law Enforcement/Emergency Agencies: Primary beneficiaries, gaining access to technology, training, grants, and federal authority to counter drones.
Federal Agencies: DHS (leads implementation, approvals, grants), FAA (airspace safety, deconfliction), DOJ (legal coordination), FCC/NTIA (communications protection), DoD (oversight review).
Critical Infrastructure Operators and Military: Benefit from threat mitigation near sites, vessels, or aircraft.
Drone Operators and Industry: Face stricter scrutiny and potential disruptions; legitimate users must comply with reporting to avoid conflicts.
Congressional Committees: Receive reports for oversight (e.g., Armed Services, Homeland Security, Judiciary, Intelligence).
General Public: Indirectly affected through enhanced safety but potential exposure to counter-drone operations.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

Legal: Grants targeted exceptions to anti-hacking, anti-interference, and privacy laws (e.g., Wiretap Act equivalents), but ties actions to "credible threats" with strict reporting and revocation to ensure accountability; requires FCC consultation to comply with spectrum regulations.
Constitutional: Potential Fourth Amendment concerns over warrantless drone interceptions or seizures, mitigated by limiting to imminent threats and privacy safeguards (e.g., referencing 6 U.S.C. § 124n(e) protections); emphasizes public safety justification.
Political: Addresses rising drone threats (e.g., smuggling, surveillance) amid growing UAS use, promoting federalism by empowering states while maintaining federal oversight; introduced in the 119th Congress (2025), referred to multiple committees, signaling broad jurisdictional interest without evident partisan divide in the text.

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

Sponsor

Rep. Smith, Christopher H. [R-NJ-4]

Recent Actions

2025-11-13: Referred to the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence.
2025-11-13: Referred to the Subcommittee on Transportation and Maritime Security.
2025-11-13: Referred to the Subcommittee on Aviation.
2025-11-12: Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Transportation and Infrastructure, Homeland Security, and Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
2025-11-12: Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Transportation and Infrastructure, Homeland Security, and Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
2025-11-12: Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Transportation and Infrastructure, Homeland Security, and Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
2025-11-12: Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Transportation and Infrastructure, Homeland Security, and Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
2025-11-12: Introduced in House
2025-11-12: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

Law Against Nefarious Drones, Enforcement, Deconfliction Act — issued 2025-11-12 — PDF (16 pages)