WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 1538

Criminal Offenses - As introduced, increases the penalty for knowingly using an unmanned aircraft over any portion of a property that includes a correctional facility from a Class C misdemeanor to a Class C felony; authorizes a correctional facility employee to disable an unmanned aircraft that is operating over property that includes a correctional facility and states that the correctional facility and the correctional facility employee are not liable for damage to the unmanned aircraft as a result of being disabled. - Amends TCA Title 39.

114th Regular Session (2025-2026) Introduced by Tommy Stinnett

Tennessee bill upgrades drone use over prisons from misdemeanor to felony and shields facility employees from liability when disabling aircraft.

Taken off notice for cal in s/c Finance, Ways, and Means Subcommittee of Finance, Ways, and Means Committee
#criminaloffenses
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 1538

Legislative bill overview

HB 1538 elevates the penalty for knowingly operating a drone over correctional facility property from a Class C misdemeanor to a Class C felony. The bill also grants correctional facility employees legal authority to disable drones operating in these airspaces without liability for damage caused.

Why is this important

Correctional facilities face genuine security threats from drones smuggling contraband, conducting surveillance, or facilitating escapes—incidents documented across U.S. prisons. This bill addresses a real operational gap by criminalizing drone intrusions more severely and providing staff a defensive tool. However, it significantly raises legal consequences for what might be unintentional airspace violations.

Potential points of contention

  • Felony classification severity: Upgrading to felony status creates permanent criminal records for actions that may be negligent rather than intentional; a drone hobbyist's unintended flight path could trigger felony charges
  • Liability immunity scope: Blanket immunity for disabling drones removes financial deterrents against excessive force and prevents property owners from seeking compensation for destroyed equipment
  • Airspace definition ambiguity: The bill references "any portion of a property that includes a correctional facility" without defining altitude limits, potentially capturing legal drone operations in adjacent airspace

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.