Bill
SB 49
Establishes a state crime for unlawful drone use, defines restricted locations, and sets penalties to deter privacy-invasive, dangerous UAS activity and protect public safety.
Status snapshot
- Bill number: SB 49
- Short title/topic: Establishing the crime of and penalties for unlawful use of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS / “drones”)
- Introduced: August 21, 2025
- Most recent action (provided): Committee Report — “Ought to Pass with Amendment #2025-3024h (NT)” (10/22/2025; vote 16–0) — indicates the committee recommends passage as amended and the bill is likely to proceed to the full chamber for further action.
Note on source material
- The user-provided documents did not include the bill’s full text. The summary below explains the bill’s purpose and the types of provisions that are commonly contained in legislation with this title and status. Where specific language, penalty amounts, or fine levels are not available in the materials provided, the summary notes that those details must be confirmed from the enrolled bill or amendment #2025-3024h.
Purpose and intent
- The bill seeks to create a state criminal offense addressing the unlawful use of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), to deter and punish dangerous, privacy-invasive, or security-threatening drone activity, and to give law enforcement tools to respond to misuse of UAS.
Key provisions (high‑level)
- Definitions: establishes terms such as “unmanned aircraft system,” “operator,” “remote pilot,” and categories of restricted locations (e.g., correctional facilities, critical infrastructure, emergency response scenes, mass gatherings, or within a specified distance of manned aircraft).
- Prohibited conduct: criminalizes conduct such as operating a UAS:
- within or above specified sensitive locations (prisons, hospitals, critical infrastructure, flight paths);
- in a manner that interferes with emergency responders or public safety operations;
- with intent to surveil, record, or photograph persons in situations with a reasonable expectation of privacy;
- to deliver contraband or weapons to confined persons;
- that recklessly endangers persons or property (endangering aircraft, vehicles, crowds).
- Penalties: authorizes graded sanctions (e.g., misdemeanor vs. felony) tied to the severity of the conduct and the harm caused — fines, incarceration, and possible civil penalties. (Exact penalty ranges were not supplied; confirm in bill text.)
- Enforcement tools: may permit seizure and forfeiture of UAS used to commit offenses; may authorize warrants or administrative processes for inspection/collection of data consistent with constitutional protections.
- Exceptions and defenses: typically exempts authorized public safety uses (law enforcement, firefighting, emergency medical transport), FAA‑compliant commercial operations, licensed research or agricultural uses, and operations conducted under a valid FAA waiver or certificate of authorization.
- Coordination with federal law: language often acknowledges FAA authority over navigable airspace and may carve out application to state criminal law consistent with federal preemption principles.
- Privacy and reporting: may include provisions protecting bystanders’ privacy, and create reporting/notice requirements or immunity for people who report unlawful UAS operations.
Who would be affected
- Primary: UAS operators (recreational and commercial), UAS retailers and rental services, and owners of UAS used in criminal activity.
- Secondary: law enforcement agencies (investigation and seizure duties), prosecutors and courts (criminal prosecutions), public safety and critical infrastructure operators, privacy advocates, commercial drone industry (compliance and training), and the general public (public safety and privacy protections).
- Federal interface: operators and industry stakeholders because FAA regulations govern many aspects of drone flight — any state criminalization must be implemented in a way that avoids unlawful federal preemption.
Procedural/timeline notes
- With a committee report of “Ought to Pass with Amendment” (10/22/2025, 16–0), the bill, as amended, is reported favorably and will normally move to the chamber floor for debate and a final vote. If passed by the originating chamber, it would then proceed to the other chamber (or to the Governor, depending on jurisdictional process) for consideration.
- The reported amendment number (#2025-3024h) should be reviewed to see changes made in committee (definitions, penalty levels, exceptions, enforcement mechanics).
Potential policy considerations and impacts
- Public safety: could reduce incidents of interference with emergency response, contraband deliveries to prisons, and hazardous flights near aircraft or crowds.
- Privacy and civil liberties: criminalizing certain surveillance uses raises constitutional and civil‑liberties questions; bill language on intent and reasonable expectation of privacy is critical.
- Industry compliance costs: commercial operators may face new training, operational, or recordkeeping obligations.
- Federal preemption/FAA coordination: careful drafting is required to avoid conflict with federal aviation law; coordinating enforcement and information-sharing with federal agencies will be important.
Next steps / recommendations
- Provide or link the bill’s full text and the committee amendment #2025-3024h so I can produce a line‑by‑line or section‑specific summary (including exact definitions, penalty levels, and exceptions).
- If desired, I can also prepare: (a) a red-line comparison showing what the committee amendment changed, (b) an analysis of constitutional and federal preemption issues, and (c) stakeholder impact briefs (law enforcement, drone industry, privacy groups).
Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.
Sign in to ask a question.
