Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Critical Infrastructure Drones topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Wyoming House approves bill to protect critical infrastructure from drones after trimming photography language
Summary
The House passed Senate File 132, creating new protections for critical infrastructure and systems from drones; members removed language criminalizing photography from the bill after free‑speech concerns, adopted a governor‑flexibility amendment and rejected a proposed appropriation for a drone‑removal fund.
The Wyoming House approved Senate File 132, a bill described as protecting critical infrastructure and systems from drones. Lawmakers debated whether the bill should ban aerial photography and how liability and enforcement should work.
An early floor amendment removed a provision that would have made photographing critical infrastructure from the air a standalone offense. Representative Yen brought the amendment, describing aerial photography as a free‑speech issue and noting that people can legally photograph facilities from the ground. The House rejected the photography ban amendment by voice (the amendment “has not been adopted”).
Members also considered liability and enforcement provisions. Representative Larson, JT, offered an amendment to create a civil damages fund (a $500,000 set‑aside) intended to cover civil damages for drone owners if law enforcement removed or destroyed a drone; that amendment was defeated in a roll‑call vote. The House then approved an amendment allowing the governor greater flexibility to designate additional facilities as critical infrastructure if necessary.
Debate touched on constitutional and operational concerns: proponents of removing the photography ban argued First Amendment protections and research/press use cases; opponents said drones can capture higher‑resolution imagery than satellites and can be used to gather tactical information about facilities and pipelines. Some lawmakers said law enforcement discretion would guide enforcement; others warned the bill, as written, creates obligations for police and the courts.
Roll‑call and recorded action: a roll‑call on amendment 2 (civil damages appropriation) returned 2 ayes, 57 noes, 3 excused and the amendment failed. Third‑reading amendment 3 (governor flexibility) was adopted by voice. The final bill passed the House 50 ayes, 9 noes, 3 excused.
The bill’s proponents said the measure targets malicious or reconnaissance drone activity near high‑value facilities such as power plants, refineries and other infrastructure; opponents requested clearer carve‑outs for press, researchers and incidental photography.
