Sponsors
Want my take on what this bill would do?
This is not an official government website.
Copyright © 2026 PLEJ LC. All rights reserved.
Revises subsection (a) and adds a new subsection (b) creating an exception allowing State or local law enforcement or the law enforcement agency of a commercial service airport, in consultation with the Commission, to use 'covered equipment' to detect, identify, or mitigate threats posed by unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft systems; defines 'covered equipment' and adopts definitions for 'unmanned aircraft' and 'unmanned aircraft system' by reference to 49 U.S.C. 44801.
Adds a new subsection (g) that defines 'covered equipment' and the referenced unmanned aircraft terms by reference to section 301, and provides that the provisions of section 302a shall not apply to actions taken by State or local law enforcement or the law enforcement agency of a commercial service airport using covered equipment in consultation with the Commission to detect, identify, or mitigate threats posed by unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft systems.
Revises subsection (a) (text replaced as indicated) and adds a new subsection (b) providing an exception to the prohibition on willful or malicious interference for actions taken by State or local law enforcement or the law enforcement agency of a commercial service airport using covered equipment in consultation with the Commission to detect, identify, or mitigate threats posed by unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft systems; adopts definitions for 'covered equipment' and references unmanned aircraft terms to section 301(b).
Amends subsection (c) of 6 U.S.C. 464 to insert a new paragraph (10) requiring the Director to develop and implement homeland security and law enforcement training curricula related to the use of Counter-UAS activities, to strike a terminal "and" at the end of paragraph (9), and to redesignate the existing paragraph (10) as paragraph (11).
Amends section 376 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (49 U.S.C. 44802) by adding a new subsection (b)(4) to permit a process for applicable State or local law enforcement agencies to notify and coordinate with the FAA regarding actions taken under the Counter-UAS authority established under section 4(a) of this Act; and by modifying subsection (c) to (i) adjust punctuation in paragraphs (3)(G) and (4) and (ii) add a new paragraph (5) establishing a process for collaboration and coordination between the FAA and State or local law enforcement regarding use of the Counter-UAS authority.
Expands the definition in 49 U.S.C. 47102 to include the purchase of equipment necessary to carry out Counter-UAS activities at commercial service airports.
Authorizes federal, state, local, and certain private actors to detect, identify, test, procure, and respond to threats from unmanned aircraft (UAS) at airports and other covered facilities, subject to coordination, consent, and constitutional safeguards. It creates processes and requirements for equipment testing and use (including consultation with FCC/NTIA), allows airport improvement funds and federal contracts to support Counter‑UAS acquisition, requires training and operational planning, and directs agencies to publish guidance, vendor lists, and procurement rules.
Commercial service airport — The term has the meaning given in paragraph (7) of section 47102 of title 49, United States Code, and also includes the area of navigable airspace necessary to ensure safety in the takeoff and landing of aircraft at the airport.
Covered air carrier — The term means an air carrier or a foreign air carrier as those terms are defined in section 40102 of title 49, United States Code.
Counter-UAS activities — This term includes: (A) detecting, identifying, monitoring, and tracking an unmanned aircraft or UAS without prior consent, including by intercepting or accessing communications used to control the aircraft; (B) warning an operator of an unmanned aircraft or UAS by passive or active, direct or indirect physical, electronic, radio, or electromagnetic means; (C) disrupting control of an unmanned aircraft or UAS without prior consent, including disabling it by intercepting or interfering with communications used to control it; (D) seizing or exercising control of an unmanned aircraft or UAS; (E) seizing or otherwise confiscating an unmanned aircraft or UAS; and (F) using reasonable force to disable, damage, or destroy an unmanned aircraft or UAS.
Navigable airspace — The term has the meaning given in paragraph (32) of section 40102 of title 49, United States Code.
Non-kinetic equipment — Equipment used to (A) intercept or otherwise access wire, oral, electronic, or radio communications used to control an unmanned aircraft or UAS; and (B) disrupt control of the unmanned aircraft or UAS without prior consent, including by disabling it by intercepting, interfering with, or causing interference with the communications used to control it.
Who is affected and how:
Airports and airport operators: Directly affected. They must form task forces, adopt single tactical response plans, and authorize Counter‑UAS activity on property; they may receive AIP funds to buy equipment but will face operational and planning responsibilities.
State and local law enforcement: Gains conditional authority to conduct Counter‑UAS detection, testing, and response in their jurisdictions but must coordinate with federal agencies and follow notification/consultation requirements when using non‑kinetic or jamming tools.
Federal agencies (FAA, TSA, OMB, departments authorized to contract, FCC/NTIA): Increased roles and responsibilities for publishing guidance, coordinating airspace safety, managing communications interference risk, updating procurement rules, maintaining vendor/equipment lists, and overseeing training and implementation.
Air carriers and passengers: Air carriers will be subject to new airport response plans and FAA/TSA best practices; passengers could see increased security actions and potential operational disruptions during UAS incidents.
Counter‑UAS vendors and private sector contractors: Expanded market and procurement opportunities through federal contracts and airport procurement, but vendors will be subject to recommended lists, risk reviews, and FAR changes.
Civil liberties and communications stakeholders: The authorization to use jamming and interception tools, even with FCC consultation, raises risks of interference with lawful communications and surveillance, and potential Fourth Amendment and privacy challenges; these will require strict operational controls and oversight.
Tribal, territorial, and private security partners: Training and access provisions extend to these groups, increasing the need for interoperable procedures and resources.
Implementation challenges and costs:
Coordination burden: Multiple agencies must coordinate operations, approvals, and notifications—complex technical and legal coordination is required to protect aviation safety and communications systems.
Training and operational costs: While some procurement can use AIP funds and federal contracts will be available, forming task forces, developing plans, and running training programs may impose planning and personnel costs on local jurisdictions.
Legal and technical risk: Use of non‑kinetic or jamming equipment can cause unintended radio interference and raise constitutional challenges; robust consultation with FCC/NTIA and adherence to FAA safety standards will be critical.
Expand sections to see detailed analysis
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Introduced April 2, 2025 by Mike Lee · Last progress April 2, 2025
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Introduced in Senate