Counter Drone State and Local Defender Act

Bill Number

H.R. 7525

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 2

Policy Area

Transportation and Public Works

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2026-02-13: Referred to the Subcommittee on Aviation.

Last Updated

2026-06-03T08:07:36Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

The "Counter Drone State and Local Defender Act" (H.R. 7525) aims to expand authority for countering threats from unmanned aircraft systems (drones) by empowering state, local, territorial, and Tribal law enforcement agencies. It seeks to protect high-risk facilities and assets from unauthorized drone operations that could endanger safety or security, while ensuring compliance with privacy laws. The bill addresses the growing use of drones by authorizing detection, mitigation, and other responses, building on federal oversight by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

Key Provisions

• FAA Counter-UAS Authorities (Section 2): Adds a new section to U.S. aviation law (49 U.S.C. § 44815) granting the FAA administrator powers to detect, track, seize, disable, or destroy drones posing credible threats to airspace safety or airport operations. This includes intercepting communications used to control drones without operator consent. The FAA can also administer these powers to subnational law enforcement. Privacy safeguards require actions to align with the First and Fourth Amendments (free speech and protection against unreasonable searches), limit data collection to necessities, and promptly dispose of records unless needed for investigations.

• General Pilot Program for Law Enforcement (Section 3(b)): Establishes a 3-year pilot allowing the FAA to designate up to 4,000 state, local, Tribal, or territorial law enforcement agencies (starting with 1,000 in year one) to use approved counter-UAS systems. Authorized actions include detecting, monitoring, and mitigating drone threats to "covered facilities or assets" (high-risk sites like critical infrastructure, approved by the FAA). Agencies must apply with detailed plans, certify privacy compliance, ensure personnel training, and report uses semiannually to Congress. Funding can come from existing federal grants for law enforcement or security.

• Special Pilot Program for 2026 FIFA World Cup (Section 3(c)): A targeted 7-month pilot (March 1 to September 30, 2026) for up to 40 agencies near host cities, focused on protecting World Cup events. Similar requirements apply, but with faster application processing (15 days) and reporting tied to the event. Post-pilot, the FAA must notify Congress of any privacy complaints.

• Permanent Authorization (Section 3(d)): After the general pilot ends, any qualifying law enforcement agency can register with the FAA for ongoing use of counter-UAS systems, subject to similar approvals, training, and reporting. Exemptions from federal laws on aircraft interference, hacking, and wiretapping apply only to authorized actions.

• Equipment Approval and Oversight (Sections 2 and 3): The FAA, in consultation with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), approves counter-UAS technologies and sets training standards. Agencies must use only approved equipment and follow FAA guidance.

• Definitions (Section 3(e)): Clarifies terms like "covered facility or asset" (high-risk sites identified by local leaders and FAA-approved) and "credible threat" (defined by the FAA as a drone risk to safety or security). "State" includes D.C. and U.S. territories.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• Expansion of FAA Powers: Previously, counter-UAS activities were limited to federal agencies (e.g., under the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024). This bill adds explicit FAA authority for proactive drone mitigation, including communication intercepts, which were not previously authorized at this level.

• Subnational Empowerment: Shifts from federal-only drone countermeasures by allowing state and local law enforcement to act independently after pilots, overriding restrictions in laws like 49 U.S.C. § 46502 (aircraft piracy), 18 U.S.C. §§ 32, 1030, 1367 (destruction of aircraft, computer fraud, communications interference), and wiretap statutes (18 U.S.C. Chapters 119 and 206). These exemptions apply only to approved, threat-specific actions.

• Privacy and Reporting Mandates: Introduces new requirements for constitutional compliance and data minimization, which were not uniformly applied to counter-UAS before. It also mandates congressional notifications on usage and complaints, enhancing oversight.

Potential Impacts

• On Government Agencies: The FAA gains expanded responsibilities for approvals, oversight, and rulemaking, potentially straining resources but improving coordinated drone security. Law enforcement agencies benefit from access to tools and funding, enabling faster threat response at local levels. FCC and NTIA involvement ensures tech compatibility without disrupting communications.

• On Citizens: Enhances public safety at high-risk sites (e.g., stadiums, power plants) by countering drone-based threats like smuggling or surveillance. However, it could affect drone hobbyists or commercial operators through warnings, seizures, or disruptions, with risks of privacy invasions if intercepts occur.

• On International Relations: Minimal direct impact, but the special World Cup pilot supports secure hosting of a global event, potentially boosting U.S. credibility in international sports and security cooperation. No provisions address foreign drones explicitly.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• Law Enforcement Agencies: State, local, Tribal, and territorial entities gain new tools but must meet training, reporting, and privacy standards.
• Federal Agencies: FAA (primary overseer), FCC, and NTIA (equipment approvals); Department of Transportation (funding access).
• Congress: Transportation and Infrastructure, and Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committees receive regular reports.
• Private Sector and Public: Operators of high-risk facilities (e.g., utilities, event venues) benefit from protection; drone users (commercial, recreational) face potential restrictions; civil liberties groups may monitor privacy compliance.
• Event Organizers: FIFA World Cup hosts in U.S. cities get tailored security for 2026.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal: Creates exemptions from criminal statutes for authorized actions, reducing liability for law enforcement but requiring strict adherence to FAA approvals to avoid lawsuits. The bill's focus on "credible threats" introduces FAA-defined standards that could be challenged in court if overly broad.

• Constitutional: Emphasizes First and Fourth Amendment protections, mandating minimal data collection and prompt record disposal to prevent unwarranted surveillance. This balances security needs with civil liberties, though intercepts of drone communications could spark debates over "unreasonable searches" if not narrowly applied.

• Political: Responds to rising drone threats (e.g., privacy violations, terrorism risks) by decentralizing authority, appealing to local governments seeking autonomy. The World Cup pilot highlights event-specific security, potentially influencing future legislation for major gatherings. It promotes bipartisan infrastructure protection without new spending, relying on existing funds, but could face opposition from privacy advocates concerned about overreach.

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

Sponsor

Rep. Burlison, Eric [R-MO-7]

Recent Actions

• 2026-02-13: Referred to the Subcommittee on Aviation.
• 2026-02-12: Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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.
• 2026-02-12: Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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.
• 2026-02-12: Introduced in House
• 2026-02-12: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• Counter Drone State and Local Defender Act — issued 2026-02-12 — PDF (25 pages)