Seven pieces of legislation have been introduced in the Hawaii State Legislature that would regulate the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (drones) to protect the privacy rights of citizens.Details
Last year, State Representative Jason Schultz (R-18) introduced a bill that would add safeguards to protect Iowan citizens from unwarranted drone surveillanceDetails
On Jan. 30, SB167 was introduced to provide restrictions on the use of drones by law enforcement, providing additional safeguards for Utah residents against warrantless surveillance. (learn about it here) STATUS – SB167 was referred to the Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee where it will need to pass by majority vote before the full…Details
Legislation has been introduced in the Iowa State House that would regulate the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (drones) to protect the privacy rights of citizens.
HF427 was introduced last year by Rep. Jason Schultz (R-18) and was lying dormant in the Public Safety Committee ever since. In January, it was reassigned to a subcommittee for an initial hearing and vote. Today, the subcommittee approved the bill, moving it on to the next step - consideration and vote in the full committee.Details
Legislation has been introduced in the Alaska State Senate that would regulate the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (drones) to protect the privacy rights of citizens.Details
House Bill 2732 known as the Freedom From Unwarranted Surveillance Act was introduced by Joshua Nelson (R-Boone) earlier this month and has already amassed 10 co-sponsors. The bill states that “a law-enforcement agency may not use a drone to gather evidence or other information” unless a proper search warrant has been issued and that “no drone operated within the State of West Virginia may carry a lethal payload.”Details
House Bill 1204 or the Preserving Freedom from Unwarranted Surveillance Act was introduced by Rep. Kenneth Wilson (R-District 12) earlier this month. The bill states that “no person, entity, or state agency shall use a drone or other unmanned aircraft to conduct surveillance or observation of any individual, property owned by an individual, farm, or agricultural industry without the consent of that individual, property owner, farm or agricultural industry.”Details
Companion bills in the Minnesota State House and Senate aim to curtail potential abuses by law enforcement pertaining to predator drones.
HF 612 and SF 485 were both introduced last month and they hope to specify guidelines to protect the privacy rights of Minnesotans. HF 612 has been referred to the Public Safety Finance and Policy Committee while SF 485 has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The bills state that “law enforcement agency may not use a drone to gather evidence or other information on individuals.” This is meant to safeguard individual citizens from excessive spying by law enforcement. However, some exceptions are given for law enforcement personnel to use drones.
Such exceptions include if it is necessary “to counter a high risk of a terrorist attack by a specific individual or organization if the secretary of the United States Department of Homeland Security determines that credible intelligence indicates that there is this risk” or “if the law enforcement agency first obtains a search warrant authorizing its use” or “if the law enforcement agency possesses reasonable suspicion that, under particular circumstances, swift action is needed to prevent imminent danger to life or serious damage to property, or to forestall the imminent escape of a suspect or the
destruction of evidence.”
Although these exceptions may seem like they could be prone to abuse (ie. DHS fabricating evidence to show that a political dissident is involved in terrorism), Subsection 4 of the bill states that “A person aggrieved by a law enforcement agency’s violation of this section may bring a civil action against the agency.” This will hopefully give the public some recourse in fighting back against unlawful infringements on their rights if the bills are passed. The bills also make evidence collected in violation of these new rules inadmissible in the court of law.Details
Add New Jersey to the long list of states opposing drone operations within their borders. Drone surveillance activity using unmanned aerial vehicles or “UAVs” has become an urgent issue threatening the right to privacy, recognized by the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution. Anti-drone legislation recently introduced by Assemblywoman Quijano (D) and co-sponsored by Assemblywoman…Details