HR-9909-119
Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
Sponsored by Ronny Jackson (R-TX)
What it does
This bill would direct the Secretary of Defense to establish or designate one or more test and training corridors within the national airspace for small unmanned aircraft systems (drones) and counter-drone technologies. The corridors would support research, development, testing, evaluation, and military training on drones, anti-drone weapons (including lasers, microwave systems, and electronic warfare), and related software and payloads. The Secretary would be required to notify Congress within 90 days of establishing any corridor, including details on location, resources needed, and any agreements with other federal agencies.
Who benefits
Active-duty military personnel who would receive structured training on drone and counter-drone systems. Defense contractors and technology companies developing drone hardware, autonomy software, and counter-drone platforms. The broader U.S. military, which would gain faster pathways to field drone-enabled weapons. Communities near selected corridor sites that may see economic activity from construction and operations. Allied nations that benefit from U.S. military drone readiness. Academic and research institutions that may partner with DoD on testing activities.
Who is hurt
Landowners, pilots, and aviation operators near designated corridors who may face airspace restrictions or disruptions from GPS jamming, electronic warfare testing, and directed energy use. Civilian telecommunications users in corridor areas who could experience spectrum interference during testing. Communities near selected sites that may bear noise, safety, or environmental burdens from weapons testing. Foreign drone manufacturers who compete with U.S. firms that would benefit from accelerated domestic development. Taxpayers who would bear construction, personnel, and operational costs, though the bill does not specify an appropriation amount.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that adversaries — particularly China — have rapidly advanced drone capabilities, and that the U.S. military currently lacks dedicated, integrated corridors to test and train on the full spectrum of drone and counter-drone technologies under realistic conditions. They contend that fragmented testing across existing facilities slows time-to-field for critical systems, and that a dedicated corridor would accelerate the development of capabilities urgently needed on modern battlefields, as demonstrated by drone warfare in Ukraine and other recent conflicts.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that the bill creates a broad new infrastructure mandate without specifying funding levels, oversight mechanisms, or clear limits on disruptive testing activities — such as GPS jamming and electronic warfare — that could interfere with civilian aviation, communications, and navigation systems in surrounding areas. They contend that existing DoD test ranges and facilities may already be sufficient for these purposes, and that establishing new corridors without a rigorous cost-benefit analysis or environmental review risks duplicating resources and imposing unexamined burdens on nearby communities.
Constitutional context
Congress's authority to establish this program rests on its Military Powers under Article I, §8, clauses 12–14, which grant Congress broad authority to raise and support armies, provide for a navy, and make rules for the government and regulation of the armed forces. The bill directs the Secretary of Defense to act, placing it squarely within Congress's zone of maximum presidential authority under Youngstown Sheet & Tube v. Sawyer (1952), as the Executive would be acting pursuant to explicit congressional authorization.
Checks and balances
The Executive branch (Secretary of Defense) gains authority to designate airspace corridors and conduct weapons testing within the national airspace; Congress retains oversight through the mandatory 90-day written notification requirement and controls funding through the Appropriations Clause (Art. I, §9, cl. 7), as the bill does not itself appropriate funds.
Historical precedent
Congress has previously authorized dedicated military test ranges and corridors for emerging technologies, including the establishment of unmanned aircraft systems test sites under the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, which directed the FAA to designate six UAS test sites across the national airspace.