Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Privacy Drones topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Bill would ban using drones to enter private property near dwellings with intent to harass or capture images

2521445 · March 6, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Delegate Chris Tomlinson presented House Bill 13-49 to criminalize knowingly operating a drone into another’s property and within 50 feet of a dwelling with intent to coerce, intimidate, harass or obtain images; sponsor said the measure mirrors statutes in other states and complements existing state law limiting local drone regulation.

Delegate Chris Tomlinson told the House Judiciary Committee that House Bill 13-49 would make it a misdemeanor to knowingly cause an unmanned aircraft system (drone) to enter another person’s property and come within 50 feet of a dwelling with intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or to obtain photographic or video images of the property, occupant or guest. The bill would not apply where consent is given or where operation is authorized and lawful under federal regulations.

Why it matters: The sponsor said the measure responds to privacy and harassment concerns where current federal airspace and civil remedies are uncertain and where some residents have threatened to shoot down drones. The bill references Maryland’s 2015 statute that limits local regulation of unmanned aircraft systems and aims to add a criminal remedy for malicious drone use that targets private dwellings.

Committee discussion addressed overlap with other pending legislation. Members noted that existing statutes (e.g., offenses against privacy and harassment) may cover some conduct and discussed whether another bill (Delegate Valentine’s) that addresses surveillance and harassment would already reach some drone behaviors. The sponsor said the bill is modeled on similar laws in other states and would specifically add a criminal prohibition related to dwellings and malicious imagery.

Outcome: The committee heard testimony and questions and did not take a vote during the hearing.