S.663 - Disabling Enemy Flight Entry and Neutralizing Suspect Equipment Act; DEFENSE Act (119th Congress)
Summary
S.663, the DEFENSE Act, aims to enhance security at events with temporary flight restrictions by authorizing the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Attorney General to deputize state and local law enforcement officers. These officers would be empowered to take countermeasures against drones posing a threat to locations such as stadiums and large public gatherings. The bill also mandates training for deputized officers and establishes oversight mechanisms to ensure responsible use of the granted authority.
Expected Effects
The bill's enactment would lead to increased drone countermeasures at protected events. This could deter potential threats from unmanned aircraft systems. It would also create a framework for cooperation between federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies in managing drone-related security risks.
Potential Benefits
- Enhanced security at public events, reducing the risk of drone-related incidents.
- Clearer lines of authority and responsibility for drone countermeasures.
- Improved coordination between federal and local law enforcement.
- Standardized training for law enforcement officers in drone countermeasures.
- A defined list of authorized equipment, promoting responsible technology use.
Potential Disadvantages
- Potential for overreach or misuse of authority by deputized officers.
- Concerns about privacy and civil liberties related to drone surveillance.
- Costs associated with training and equipping state and local law enforcement.
- Possible conflicts between federal and local control over drone countermeasures.
- Risk of unintended consequences from drone countermeasures, such as disrupting legitimate drone activities.
Most Disadvantaged Areas:
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's focus on national security and public safety aligns with the government's responsibility to "insure domestic Tranquility" and "provide for the common defence," as stated in the Preamble of the US Constitution. The authorization of drone countermeasures could be viewed as an extension of law enforcement powers, which are generally reserved to the states but can be preempted by federal law when necessary and proper to execute enumerated powers. However, the potential impact on individual liberties, particularly regarding surveillance and privacy, raises concerns under the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).