Law Enforcement and Technology: Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems

Law Enforcement and Technology: Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems

Law Enforcement and Technology: Use of
August 22, 2023
Unmanned Aircraft Systems
Kristin Finklea
Alongside growth in the use of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), commonly referred to as
Specialist in Domestic
drones, for both commercial and recreational purposes, law enforcement agencies’ use of this
Security
technology has been increasing as well. Drones are one of many technologies that agencies are

increasingly employing, and these devices are used for a variety of purposes from gathering
intelligence and evidence to providing for remote communication and operational support.

There is no specific legislative framework that governs federal law enforcement use of drones. Generally, federal law does
not direct or prohibit specific tools and technologies—such as UAS—used by federal law enforcement agencies to aid
investigations. Rather, there are laws and policies broadly governing law enforcement investigations and intelligence
gathering. Additionally, there are a number of policies directing the use of drones by federal agencies, including law
enforcement, and pertinent guidance resources including the following:
• A 2015 presidential memorandum, Promoting Economic Competitiveness While Safeguarding Privacy,
Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties in Domestic Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems, placed certain
requirements on executive departments and agencies—including law enforcement agencies—that use UAS.
Its requirements include protecting privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties; ensuring accountability of
agencies using UAS; and promoting transparency of UAS programs.
• The Department of Justice (DOJ) maintains the Department of Justice Policy on the Use of Unmanned
Aircraft Systems, which guides the department’s use of this technology. DOJ also has a UAS Working
Group, which is a forum to discuss and coordinate UAS-related matters.
• DOJ’s UAS programs are not centralized at the department level; rather, they are managed by each
agency employing a UAS program. DOJ notes that each of its five law enforcement components
(Federal Bureau of Investigation; Drug Enforcement Administration; Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms, and Explosives; U.S. Marshals Service; Bureau of Prisons) uses UAS in support of its law
enforcement and national security missions.
• The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) does not have a department-wide policy on its agencies’ use
of UAS, though it has developed Best Practices for Protecting Privacy, Civil Rights & Civil Liberties in
Unmanned Aircraft Systems Programs to support its component agencies’ and law enforcement partners’
use of the technology.
• Like DOJ, DHS activities involving UAS are managed at the agency level. Both U.S. Customs and
Border Protection and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Homeland Security Investigation
use UAS in support of law enforcement activities.
Some observers have raised concerns that law enforcement use of drones could infringe upon individuals’ privacy or could
chill free speech—such as in situations where law enforcement may fly drones over First Amendment-protected activities.
Others argue that drone use can greatly enhance public safety and national security—including using them as first responders.
Policymakers may debate the tradeoffs as they conduct oversight or legislate on law enforcement use of UAS. For example,
in conducting oversight of federal law enforcement use of UAS, key considerations policymakers may examine include the
extent to which agencies adhere to the 2015 presidential memorandum on UAS or to their department- or agency-specific
policy guidance. With respect to legislating on law enforcement use of UAS, while Congress can legislate directly on federal
law enforcement agencies’ use of the technology, policymakers may seek to influence the use of UAS at the state, local, and
tribal law enforcement levels through means such as the provision or withholding of federal grant funding.
Congressional Research Service

link to page 5 link to page 6 link to page 6 link to page 7 link to page 9 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 11 link to page 12 Law Enforcement and Technology: Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems

Contents
How UAS May Be Used by Federal Law Enforcement Agencies .................................................. 2
Presidential Memorandum on UAS .......................................................................................... 3
Selected Federal Law Enforcement Policies on Using UAS .................................................... 3
Department of Justice (DOJ) Use of UAS .......................................................................... 4
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Use of UAS ..................................................... 6
Policy Considerations Surrounding Law Enforcement Use of UAS ............................................... 7
Oversight of Law Enforcement Use of Drones ......................................................................... 7
Influencing Law Enforcement Use of Drones ........................................................................... 8

Contacts
Author Information .......................................................................................................................... 9

Congressional Research Service

Law Enforcement and Technology: Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems

longside growth in the use of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), commonly referred to as
drones, for both commercial and recreational purposes, law enforcement agencies’ use of
A this technology has been increasing as well.1 One estimate from 2020 indicates that more
than 1,500 state and local public safety agencies (over 70% of which work in law enforcement)
had acquired drones at that time—an increase of more than 500 agencies from the estimated
number in 2018.2 Drones are one of many technologies that agencies are increasingly employing,
and these devices are used for a variety of purposes, from gathering intelligence and evidence to
providing for remote communication and operational support.
The use of drones by law enforcement agencies raises questions across a range of topics. Some
observers may question the scope and effectiveness of laws and policies governing law
enforcement agencies’ use of this technology. Others may examine how drone use may
simultaneously enhance law enforcement agencies’ work and potentially infringe upon
individuals’ privacy and civil liberties. Some concerns about drone use have manifested in state-
level actions to prohibit or bound law enforcement agencies’ use of UAS.3
This report focuses on the uses of UAS specifically for law enforcement purposes.4 It provides an
overview of federal law enforcement agencies’ policies and use of this technology. It also
discusses considerations for policymakers debating whether or how to affect federal, state, and
local law enforcement agencies’ use of UAS.
Conceptualizing Unmanned Aircraft Systems5
An unmanned aircraft is defined in U.S. Code as an aircraft that is operated without the possibility of direct human
intervention from within or on the aircraft.6 An unmanned aircraft system (UAS), or drone, generally refers to the
entire drone system, including both the unmanned aircraft and ground control unit.7 As such, an unmanned aircraft
is generally considered a subpart of a UAS rather than a synonym because it only refers to the aircraft, not the
entire system.

1 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) data on drones registered in the United States are available at
https://www.faa.gov/node/54496. This report uses the terms UAS and drone interchangeably.
2 Dan Gettinger, Public Safety Drones, 3rd Edition, Center for the Study of the Drone at Bard College, March 2020. For
the purpose of this study, public safety agencies include law enforcement (police, sheriff’s offices, campus police),
emergency management, and fire and rescue entities.
3 For instance, in June 2023 Illinois enacted HB3902, the Drones as First Responders Act, which, among other things,
places restrictions on law enforcement agencies’ retention of data gathered with drones and on equipping drones with
facial recognition technology or weapons. For more information on state laws involving UAS, see National Conference
of State Legislatures, Current Unmanned Aircraft State Law Landscape, March 27, 2023.
4 A discussion of additional official uses of UAS, including those by the military, and efforts by law enforcement
agencies to counter the unlawful use of UAS is beyond the scope of this report.
5 For an overview of UAS, see CRS Report R44352, Unmanned Aircraft Operations in Domestic Airspace: U.S. Policy
Perspectives and the Regulatory Landscape.
6 49 U.S.C. §44801(11).
7 49 U.S.C. §44801(12). See also Department of Justice (DOJ), Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) and
Police Executive Research Forum (PERF), Drones: A Report on the Use of Drones by Public Safety Agencies—and a
Wake-Up Call about the Threat of Malicious Drone Attacks, 2020, https://portal.cops.usdoj.gov/resourcecenter/RIC/
Publications/cops-w0894-pub.pdf. At times, other terms such as small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS) or unmanned
aerial vehicle (UAV) have been used to refer to UAS.
Congressional Research Service

1

Law Enforcement and Technology: Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems

How UAS May Be Used by Federal Law
Enforcement Agencies
Law enforcement agencies—including federal law enforcement—may use UAS for a variety of
purposes.8 For instance, they may use drones to gather intelligence prior to conducting an
operation. This can reportedly help with identifying where a suspect may be hiding or with
visualizing the layout of a building before officers enter. Drones can also be used to support an
operation that is underway; for example, by live streaming an operation to monitor where a
suspect exited a building or to illuminate where a suspect might have discarded evidence when
officers cannot see all the possibilities from the ground. Drones can also be used to collect photo
evidence in instances where access may be hindered or dangerous. They can aid in reconstructing
certain scenes such as those involving traffic accidents, fires or explosives, or crime scenes where
an aerial view can provide an additional perspective. Drones can serve as a force multiplier by
helping officers search for suspects or missing persons, because UAS can survey more ground at
a faster pace than officers.
Some observers note that drones can help enhance officer safety in a number of ways, such as by
providing visuals on dangerous suspects or collecting evidence from hazardous crime scenes
(e.g., those involving explosives). They can also provide for remote communication—such as
with a hidden suspect or one who has taken hostages—and distance may provide a valuable
safety buffer to officers, potential victims, and others nearby.
Generally, federal law does not direct or prohibit specific tools and technologies—such as UAS—
used by law enforcement agencies to aid investigations. However, there are a number of policies
that govern their use, as discussed below.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Policies on Law Enforcement Drone Use
The FAA offers law enforcement agencies two options for operating UAS under 55 pounds:
•
Operating under the small UAS rule. This rule, also called the Part 107 rule (named after 14 C.F.R. part 107)
allows entities, including law enforcement agencies, to operate UAS at or below 400 feet above ground level
in operations that have “visual line of sight” of the aircraft.9
•
Receiving a certificate of authorization (COA) to function as a public aircraft operator.10 Law enforcement
agencies that receive the COA are able to self-certify drone pilots to carry out official law enforcement
operations.
The FAA can also issue emergency authorizations to entities operating under the Part 107 rule or with a COA,
allowing them to carry out specified law enforcement operations under certain conditions.11 An emergency
authorization can include a tactical beyond visual line of sight waiver; while drone operators are normally required to
have a visual line of sight of the aircraft, the FAA can grant an authority for law enforcement officers to operate
outside of these parameters in emergency situations.12

8 The uses of drones discussed in this section are outlined in sources including Charles Werner, “11 Ways Police
Departments Are Using Drones,” Police1, January 7, 2023; DOJ, COPS and PERF, Drones: A Report on the Use of
Drones by Public Safety Agencies—and a Wake-Up Call about the Threat of Malicious Drone Attacks, 2020,
https://portal.cops.usdoj.gov/resourcecenter/RIC/Publications/cops-w0894-pub.pdf; and DOJ, Department of Justice
Summary of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Operations During Fiscal Year 2022, December 1, 2022.
9 14 C.F.R. §107.
10 49 U.S.C. §§40102(a) and 40125.
11 FAA, Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS), Advanced Operations, Emergency Situations, https://www.faa.gov/uas/
advanced_operations/emergency_situations.
12 FAA, First Responder Tactical Beyond Visual Line of Sight (TBVLOS) 91.113 Waiver Guide, https://www.faa.gov/
sites/faa.gov/files/uas/public_safety_gov/public_safety_toolkit/TBVLOS_Waiver_Final.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

2

Law Enforcement and Technology: Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems

Presidential Memorandum on UAS
A 2015 presidential memorandum, Promoting Economic Competitiveness While Safeguarding
Privacy, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties in Domestic Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems
(hereinafter, “2015 presidential memorandum on UAS”), placed certain requirements on
executive branch departments and agencies that use UAS. It notes that “as with information
collected by the Federal Government using any technology, where UAS is the platform for
collection, information must be collected, used, retained, and disseminated consistent with the
Constitution, Federal law, and other applicable regulations and policies.”13 While this directive is
not specific to federal law enforcement, it encompasses federal law enforcement agencies using
UAS. The directives in the memorandum include the following:14
• Protecting privacy. Before deploying new UAS technology, and every three
years thereafter, agencies shall examine their policies and procedures with
respect to the collection, use, retention, and dissemination of information
obtained from UAS to ensure the protection of privacy, civil rights, and civil
liberties.
• Protecting civil rights and civil liberties. Agencies shall ensure UAS activities
are conducted in accordance with the Constitution, applicable laws, executive
orders, and presidential directives, and that there are processes in place to address
complaints with respect to privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties. Agencies shall
ensure their data collection using UAS technology does not violate the First
Amendment or antidiscrimination laws.
• Ensuring accountability. Agencies shall have UAS oversight policies and
procedures consistent with agency policies and regulations. They shall have rules
of conduct and training for individuals working on UAS programs and have
policies for oversight of individuals with access to sensitive information collected
with UAS. They shall also confirm that UAS data sharing policies conform to
laws, policies, and regulations. Agencies shall ensure they have policies to
authorize UAS use in response to support requests from federal, state, local,
tribal, or territorial government operations. They shall also ensure that any
recipients of grant funding to purchase or use UAS have policies to safeguard
privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties.
• Promoting transparency. Without compromising law enforcement or national
security, agencies shall provide public notice about the location of their
authorized UAS operations; provide public information about their UAS
operations and how they are safeguarding privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties;
and provide an annual summary report of their UAS operations, including
information on UAS mission types and assistance provided to other agencies or
federal, state, local, tribal, or territorial governments.
Selected Federal Law Enforcement Policies on Using UAS
Federal law enforcement agencies across a number of departments may rely on UAS technology
to aid in carrying out their law enforcement duties. This section provides examples from the
Department of Justice (DOJ) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) of policies directing

13 The White House, Promoting Economic Competitiveness While Safeguarding Privacy, Civil Rights, and Civil
Liberties in Domestic Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems, presidential memorandum, February 15, 2015.
14 Ibid.
Congressional Research Service

3

Law Enforcement and Technology: Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems

law enforcement use of UAS. These examples highlight the scope of existing policies that guide
law enforcement activities involving drones.
Department of Justice (DOJ) Use of UAS
A number of DOJ’s components (Federal Bureau of Investigation [FBI]; Drug Enforcement
Administration [DEA]; Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives [ATF]; U.S.
Marshals Service [USMS]; and Bureau of Prisons [BOP]) use UAS in support of its law
enforcement and national security missions.15 DOJ issued the Department of Justice Policy on the
Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems, which guides the department’s use of this technology.16 The
policy requires DOJ components to adhere to certain requirements when using UAS, including
the following:
• Legal compliance. DOJ use of UAS must comply with constitutional provisions
and federal law and regulations, including antidiscrimination laws and policies.
• Scope. UAS may only be used in connection with “properly authorized
investigations and activities,” which are defined by statutory authorities; rules
and regulations; and Attorney General Guidelines, policies, and guidance.
• Approval. DOJ components must ensure UAS operations are approved at an
“appropriate level,” based on particular operational and tactical needs of that
component, and these approval levels must in turn be approved by the Deputy
Attorney General.
• Airspace access. UAS operations must comply with FAA regulations, and DOJ
components must work with the FAA to develop plans to provide necessary
support for air traffic and airspace management.
• Training. The Deputy Attorney General is responsible for approving minimum
UAS training standards, including relevant legal and policy requirements, and
DOJ components may implement additional requirements tailored to their needs.
DOJ employees operating UAS must be certified as having completed the
training requirements.
• Reporting. The Deputy Attorney General is responsible for issuing requirements
for department components to track and report information on UAS operations,
including operations in which DOJ components are providing UAS support to
other federal, state, local, tribal, or territorial agencies as well as operations in
which DOJ components receive such support from other agencies. Annual
minimum reporting requirements include descriptions of mission categories
involving UAS, data on component support provided to or received from other
agencies (and information on its purpose), and the privacy review conducted for
the components’ UAS activities.
• Stakeholder engagement. DOJ components may engage with stakeholders,
including law enforcement and other community stakeholders, and in doing so
must ensure the protection of law enforcement, national security, and other
protected information.

15 DOJ, Department of Justice Summary of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Operations During Fiscal Year 2022,
December 1, 2022.
16 DOJ, Justice Manual, Title 9: Criminal, 9-95.100 Department of Justice Policy on the Use of Unmanned Aircraft
Systems, https://www.justice.gov/jm/9-95000-unmanned-aircraft-systems-uas. DOJ notes that this 2019 policy
supersedes earlier guidance issued in 2015.
Congressional Research Service

4

Law Enforcement and Technology: Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems

• Privacy and civil liberties protections. DOJ components are responsible for
assessing potential intrusiveness and effects on privacy and civil liberties before
determining whether or how to use cameras and other sensors associated with
UAS. Privacy officials are responsible for making these assessments prior to their
use. Components are also responsible for addressing privacy and civil liberties
complaints.
• Data retention. Information collected using UAS that may contain personally
identifiable information may not be retained for longer than 180 days unless it is
necessary for an authorized purpose or is maintained in a system of records
pursuant to the Privacy Act.17 Any retained data must be protected in compliance
with federal laws, regulations, and policies.
• Procurement. Any procurement of information technology associated with UAS
constituent parts must comply with relevant laws, policies, and regulations.
Additionally, department components providing grants to state, local, tribal, or
territorial agencies to purchase or use UAS must verify that grant recipients have
procedures in place to safeguard privacy and civil liberties and mitigate
cybersecurity risks.
• Implementation. DOJ components seeking to use UAS must implement DOJ’s
standards and requirements with respect to the technology and must issue
component-specific UAS policies consistent with the Department of Justice
Policy on the Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems.
This policy only applies to DOJ components and not other federal, state, local, tribal, or territorial
law enforcement agencies that may be using drones. However, if DOJ components are working
with other agencies on joint investigations or task forces, the DOJ components—and possibly by
extension, their partners—would need to adhere to the DOJ policies.
UAS Working Group
DOJ has a UAS Working Group,18 which is a forum to discuss and coordinate UAS-related
matters. It is chaired by the Office of Legal Policy (OLP). OLP consults with the working group
on a number of activities, including advising the Deputy Attorney General on UAS training
standards, UAS tracking and reporting requirements, and recommended changes or improvements
to the department’s UAS policy. In supporting DOJ’s UAS policy, OLP also reviews DOJ
components’ proposals with respect to the approval level at which UAS operations are approved
within a component as well as components’ implementation of DOJ’s UAS policy. Further, OLP
supports DOJ annual reporting on UAS operations as well as reporting on UAS procurement and
training. It also shares best practices on UAS use across the department and with law enforcement
partners.

17 For more information, see U.S. General Services Administration, Systems of Records – Privacy Act,
https://www.gsa.gov/reference/gsa-privacy-program/systems-of-records-privacy-act.
18 This working group “includes representatives from the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Drug Enforcement
Administration, the United States Marshals Service, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the
Bureau of Prisons, the Office of the Deputy Attorney General, the Office of Legal Policy, the National Security
Division, the Criminal Division, the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, the Office of Justice Programs, the
Office of Community Oriented Policing, the Office of Privacy and Civil Liberties, the Office of the Chief Information
Officer, and the Office of Legislative Affairs.” See DOJ, Justice Manual, Title 9: Criminal, 9-95.100 Department of
Justice Policy on the Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems, https://www.justice.gov/jm/9-95000-unmanned-aircraft-
systems-uas.
Congressional Research Service

5

Law Enforcement and Technology: Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems

DOJ UAS Activities
DOJ’s UAS programs are not centralized at the department level; rather, they are managed by
each component employing a UAS program. For instance, the FBI’s UAS program is managed by
its Critical Incident Response Group, which is responsible for, among other things, managing the
FBI’s mobile and aviation surveillance programs (which encompasses its UAS program).19
DOJ publishes an annual report on its UAS activities that outlines how it complies with the
requirements of the 2015 presidential memorandum on UAS.20 In its most recent report, on
FY2022 UAS activities, DOJ notes that five components (FBI, DEA, ATF, USMS, and BOP) use
UAS to carry out their law enforcement and national security missions. Specifically, in FY2022
these agencies conducted 1,447 UAS deployments21 for purposes including “fire and explosive
scene investigation; pre-warrant surveillance; photography; officer safety; execution of search
warrants; communications tower inspections; criminal investigations; counterterrorism;
counterintelligence; counter weapons of mass destruction; fugitive apprehension; and judicial
security.”22
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Use of UAS
Like DOJ, DHS activities involving UAS are managed at the agency level rather than being
centralized at the department level. DHS does not have a department-wide policy on law
enforcement use of UAS, though it has developed best practices for protecting privacy, civil
rights, and civil liberties in UAS programs.23 These best practices were developed by the DHS
Unmanned Aircraft Systems Privacy, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Working Group to inform
DHS and its federal, state, and local government partners and grantees about UAS program
policies respecting privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties.24 And, like other executive branch
components, DHS is subject to the directives outlined in the 2015 presidential memorandum on
UAS.
DHS UAS Activities
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) uses
Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems, or small drones, among its suite of surveillance technologies
to support its investigations.25 DHS notes that it complies with FAA regulations that apply to
commercial and recreational small UAS users. DHS further notes that any video recordings
collected through the use of its small drones are to be used only for official purposes in
compliance with Homeland Security Investigations Directive 19-01, and not in violation of the
First Amendment or in a manner that targets individuals based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual

19 DOJ, FBI, FY20204 President’s Budget Request, February 2023.
20 Annual reports are available at https://www.justice.gov/olp/unmanned-aircraft-systems.
21 DOJ notes that these deployments refer to the sending and/or tasking of a UAS and one or more operators in support
of an official duty and that any given deployment might involve more than one UAS flight, often due to UAS battery
life.
22 DOJ, Department of Justice Summary of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Operations During Fiscal Year 2022,
December 1, 2022.
23 DHS, Best Practices for Protecting Privacy, Civil Rights & Civil Liberties in Unmanned Aircraft Systems Programs,
December 18, 2015. These best practices are consistent with the 2015 presidential memorandum on UAS.
24 Ibid.
25 Other surveillance technologies include body wires, location tracking technologies, cell-site simulators, license plate
readers, and video surveillance technology. See DHS, Privacy Impact Assessment for the Homeland Security
Investigation (HSI) Surveillance Technologies, January 24, 2022.
Congressional Research Service

6

Law Enforcement and Technology: Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems

orientation, gender identity, or national origin.26 Any use of video recordings collected by these
small drones must also be approved by an HSI supervisor in coordination with ICE counsel.27
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) uses a variety of aircraft, including small and large
UAS, for border surveillance and law enforcement purposes. CBP notes that they may be
equipped with video, radar, and sensor technologies.28 Specifically, when CBP uses UAS for law
enforcement purposes, they support operations conducted by other DHS components such as ICE
and other federal law enforcement agencies such as the FBI or DEA. In these cases, requests for
UAS support are reviewed by “the respective [U.S. Border Patrol] sector Chief Patrol Agent
responsible for the geographic area in which operations are to be conducted for authorization.”29
Policy Considerations Surrounding Law
Enforcement Use of UAS
There is no specific federal legislative framework that governs federal law enforcement use of
drones. Rather, there are laws and policies broadly governing law enforcement investigations and
intelligence gathering; and, there are laws and policies broadly governing drone operations. In
addition, there are policies, but not laws, governing the specific use of drones by federal law
enforcement.
Some observers argue that drone use can greatly enhance public safety and national security—
including using them as first responders.30 Others have raised concerns that law enforcement use
of drones could infringe upon individuals’ privacy or could chill free speech—such as in
situations where law enforcement flies drones over First Amendment-protected activities.31
Policymakers may debate the tradeoffs. If Congress debates law enforcement use of specific
technologies such as UAS, it may consider how any boundaries might apply. For example, while
many tools and technologies used by law enforcement agencies to aid investigations have not
been specifically permitted or prohibited by law, Congress has legislated on and conducted
oversight of certain technologies that could affect individual privacy. With electronic surveillance,
for instance, investigators must generally obtain a warrant to conduct wiretaps32; however,
exceptions exist for emergency situations that may involve death or serious injury, threaten
national security, or involve conspiracies of organized crime.33 Policymakers may consider these
issues as they conduct oversight or debate legislation on law enforcement use of drones.
Oversight of Law Enforcement Use of Drones
Congress could consider oversight of federal law enforcement use of UAS through a variety of
mechanisms, including hearings and directives to oversight entities such as the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) or various department and agency Inspectors General. Among the

26 Homeland Security Investigations Directive 19-01, Use of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems, issued April 3, 2019,
outlines ICE HSI policies and procedures for the use and operation of UAS.
27 DHS, Privacy Impact Assessment for the Homeland Security Investigation (HSI) Surveillance Technologies, January
24, 2022.
28 DHS, Privacy Impact Assessment Update for the Aircraft Systems, April 6, 2018.
29 Ibid. Similarly, state and local law enforcement may also request UAS support from CBP.
30 Wayne Parham, “10 Tips for Starting a Drone as First Responder Program,” Police Magazine, March 17, 2023.
31 Matthew Guariglia, How are Police Using Drones?, Electronic Frontier Foundation, January 6, 2022.
32 18 U.S.C. §2510, et seq. See also Department of Justice, Justice Manual, Title 9, 9.7000: Electronic Surveillance.
33 18 U.S.C. §2518.
Congressional Research Service

7

Law Enforcement and Technology: Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems

issues that could receive attention, policymakers might opt to examine agency adherence to the
2015 presidential memorandum on UAS or to their department or agency-specific policy
guidance, such as the Department of Justice Policy on the Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems.34
Policymakers might also opt to explore how law enforcement use of drones intersects with other
technologies, such as facial recognition technology (FRT). Questions have been raised about the
extent to which drones may be able to support FRT systems onboard as well as which videos and
images captured by UAS may be used in law enforcement agencies’ FRT programs.35 Some of the
concerns raised about law enforcement use of drones, including privacy risks, have also been
raised about law enforcement use of other technologies such as FRT.36 Some jurisdictions have
responded to these concerns by placing restrictions on drones being equipped with FRT.37
Influencing Law Enforcement Use of Drones
Policymakers can legislate directly on federal law enforcement agencies’ ability to utilize certain
technologies such as drones, as well as specify under which circumstances federal law
enforcement may use these tools. They can also direct federal departments and agencies to
develop or rely on established guidelines surrounding the technologies, require them to use
technology that meets specified standards, and conduct broad oversight of law enforcement
agencies’ use of UAS.
Congress can also influence state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies’ use of UAS
technologies through the provision or withholding of grant funding. Programs such as the Edward
Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) program38 and the Community Oriented Policing
Services (COPS) program39 have been used to incentivize certain activities by state and local law
enforcement and could similarly be leveraged to support or restrict agencies’ use of UAS.
Congress could also further specify when, and under what circumstances, grant programs may be
used to support law enforcement use of UAS. However, even when supporting a drone program
may be considered as generally falling under the umbrella of a statutorily allowable use of funds,
federal agencies may prohibit the use of funds for UAS in some cases. For instance, DOJ’s
Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA)—which administers the JAG program (a program which
allows grant recipients to use funds for equipment and supplies, among other purpose areas)—
notes that currently, “the use of BJA grant funds for unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), including

34 Some entities have conducted oversight at various points. For instance, DOJ’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG)
issued a 2015 Audit of the Department of Justice’s Use and Support of Unmanned Aircraft Systems, available at
https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2015/a1511.pdf. Since then, DOJ has developed the Department of Justice Policy on the
Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems, which provides for guidelines and record-keeping requirements that did not exist
when the DOJ OIG issued its 2015 report.
35 Drew Harwell, “FBI, Pentagon Helped Research Facial Recognition for Street Cameras, Drones,” Washington Post,
March 7, 2023.
36 A discussion of other technologies used by law enforcement is outside the scope of this report. For information on
law enforcement use of FRT, see CRS Report R46586, Federal Law Enforcement Use of Facial Recognition
Technology.
37 For instance, in June 2023 Illinois enacted HB3902, the Drones as First Responders Act, which, among other things,
places restrictions on law enforcement agencies equipping drones with FRT. It is permissible in certain situations
involving a credible terrorist threat, imminent harm to life, or imminent escape of a suspect or destruction of evidence.
38 For more information, see CRS In Focus IF10691, The Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG)
Program.
39 For more information, see CRS In Focus IF10922, Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Program.
Congressional Research Service

8

Law Enforcement and Technology: Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems

unmanned aircraft vehicles (UAV), and all accompanying accessories to support UAS or UAV is
unallowable.”40
In addition to providing grants for state and local law enforcement use of UAS, grantmaking
entities have provided guidance to agencies implementing these programs. For instance, DOJ’s
COPS Office, along with the Police Executive Research Forum and the UAS Working Group,
developed a roadmap for state, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement implementing an
effective UAS program, as well as strategies for these agencies on community engagement and
education on their UAS programs. Among other things, they recommend strategies for the
planning, implementation, and operational phases to address concerns about privacy and the
purpose and details of drone use.41 Policymakers could consider the federal role in providing
guidance to state and local entities, and whether any adjustments are warranted.

Author Information

Kristin Finklea

Specialist in Domestic Security

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

40 DOJ, BJA, Funding & Awards, https://bja.ojp.gov/funding.
41 Community Oriented Policing Services and Police Executive Research Forum, Community Engagement Strategies
for State, Local, Tribal, and Territorial Law Enforcement Unmanned Aircraft System Programs, 2022.
Congressional Research Service
R47660 · VERSION 1 · NEW
9