HR-8697-119
Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committees on Transportation and Infrastructure, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Sponsored by Michael McCaul (R-TX)
What it does
This bill would authorize members of the National Guard, at the request of a state's governor, to take counter-drone actions at certain protected facilities and National Special Security Events. It would amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 and titles 10 and 32 of the U.S. Code to bring the Secretary of Defense into the counter-drone authorization chain alongside the FAA and DHS, and would allow National Guard members to be ordered to active duty specifically for counter-drone missions without requiring a declared war or national emergency.
Who benefits
State governors who gain a new tool to request National Guard counter-drone support. Facilities designated as National Special Security Events (e.g., presidential inaugurations, major political conventions, Super Bowl venues). Critical infrastructure operators — such as power plants, water systems, and military installations — near which drone threats have been reported. Local law enforcement agencies that currently lack the legal authority or equipment to counter drones. The general public attending large protected events. National Guard units and personnel who gain a clearer legal framework and expanded mission authority.
Who is hurt
Commercial drone operators and hobbyists who may face expanded no-fly enforcement zones and interdiction risk near protected sites. Civil liberties organizations concerned about expanded military presence in domestic airspace. Aviation industry stakeholders who may face increased airspace restrictions. States or localities that prefer to handle drone threats through civilian law enforcement rather than military channels. Potentially, individuals whose drones are destroyed or disabled without a prior judicial process.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that drone incursions over sensitive sites — including military bases, power plants, and major public events — have increased sharply in recent years, and that existing law leaves a gap: only a narrow set of federal agencies currently hold counter-drone authority, leaving state National Guards unable to act even when they are the most readily available force. They contend this bill fills that gap with appropriate safeguards by requiring a governor's request and Secretary of Defense authorization, mirroring the federalism structure already used for other National Guard domestic missions.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that expanding military counter-drone authority into domestic airspace — even through the National Guard — risks normalizing the use of armed forces against civilian aircraft and blurring the line between military and law enforcement functions that the Posse Comitatus Act was designed to maintain. They contend that the bill's broad waiver of federal criminal statutes (including computer fraud and wiretapping laws in titles 18 and 49) creates significant civil liberties exposure, and that civilian agencies such as the FAA and DHS already have counter-drone authority that could be expanded without involving the military.
Constitutional context
The bill implicates the Commander-in-Chief Clause (Art. II, §2) and Congress's military powers (Art. I, §8, cls. 12–14), as it expands the domestic operational role of the National Guard under both federal (Title 10) and state-federal (Title 32) authority. Under Youngstown Sheet & Tube v. Sawyer (1952), presidential and military action is on its strongest footing when authorized by Congress — which this bill would provide — placing any resulting Guard actions squarely in Justice Jackson's Zone 1 of maximum executive authority.
Checks and balances
The Executive branch (Secretary of Defense) gains new domestic counter-drone authority, but it is checked by the requirement that a state governor must first request activation, and Congress retains oversight through the Armed Services, Transportation, and Judiciary Committees to which the bill was referred.
Historical precedent
The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 and the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2018 first granted limited counter-drone authority to DHS and DOJ for specific federal sites, establishing the statutory framework this bill would expand to include the National Guard.