Unlawful Use of a Drone and Law Enforcement Drone Mitigation Authority Chapter 55 of the Laws of 2026
Unlawful Use of a Drone and Law Enforcement Drone Mitigation Authority
Chapter 55 of the Laws of 2026
Synopsis: As part of the state budget process, Governor Hochul signed legislation addressing the use and mitigation of drones. Unless otherwise noted, the law takes effect on August 25, 2026.
Part I: Unlawful Use of a Drone (Penal Law § 280.05)
The law adds new Penal Law Article 280 to criminalize the unlawful use of a drone. A drone is defined as “an unmanned aircraft and its associated operating system, including the hardware and software managing flight control, navigation, and sensors for autonomous or remote flight without the possibility of direct human intervention from within or on the aircraft.” A person commits unlawful use of a drone, a class A misdemeanor, by either:
- operating a drone in a “nefarious manner;” or
- operating a drone over a prohibited space without express prior approval from someone the operator reasonably believes is authorized to grant it.
“Prohibited space” means any area within five hundred feet horizontally of the outer perimeter or boundary, and four hundred feet vertically above the surface of the following locations: airports; state or federal military installations; state, local, or federal correctional facilities; police stations; fire stations; emergency services dispatch stations; large public gatherings; critical infrastructure; and schools. A drone is operated in a “nefarious manner” when it:
- constitutes or facilitates the commission of a crime;
- recklessly creates a substantial risk of physical injury to another person;
- recklessly creates a substantial risk of damage to property;
- knowingly or intentionally interferes with an emergency response, law enforcement operation, search and rescue, disaster response, medical evacuation, or other public-safety operation;
- is used to harass, intimidate, stalk, surveil, or physically menace another person in a manner that would otherwise violate state or local law;
- is used to deliver, or to attempt or facilitate the delivery of, contraband to a correctional, detention, secure treatment, or other secure governmental facility;
- is operated knowing it is equipped, modified, or operated to discharge, drop, spray, project, or release a projectile, substance, or object in a manner that creates a substantial risk of injury, property damage, or disruption of public-safety operations; or
- is used for the unauthorized surveillance of a state or federal military installation.
The offense gives law enforcement a state criminal charge for drone incursions over sensitive sites and for dangerous or harassing drone use. The “prohibited space” definition does not require proof of dangerous intent – operating over a covered location without authorization is itself the violation – so officers should be made aware of the five hundred foot horizontal and four-hundred-foot vertical geometry and on documenting the absence of authorization. This is a charge against the operator of the drone.
The new law does not apply to:
- toy drones operated solely for recreation, unless operated as to recklessly create a substantial risk of injury to another person or substantial risk of property damage;
- recreational drones operated solely for hobby or recreation in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local law, subject to the same recklessness exception;
- drones operated for commercial, educational, agricultural, journalistic, infrastructure, or other lawful purposes in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local law, subject to the same recklessness exception; and
- government employees, or persons acting on behalf of a state or local government entity, acting in a manner consistent with their governmental duties.
What You Need to Know: The government employee exemption indicates that lawful public safety drone operations are not themselves criminalized. The recklessness exceptions, however, mean that even an otherwise-exempt operator can commit the offense if the drone is flown so as to create a substantial risk of injury or property damage.
Part II: Law Enforcement Drone Mitigation Authority (Executive Law § 236)
The new law also adds Executive Law Section 236 which authorizes police officers and peace officers, acting within their jurisdiction, to take reasonable and necessary mitigation measures against a credible threat that a drone poses to the safety or security of people or prohibited spaces. Authorized measures may include detection, tracking, and identification, and the interception or disabling of a drone through legal and safe methods, both non-kinetic and kinetic. The statute imposes a layered set of conditions:
- Kinetic measures (physically disabling or destroying the drone) may be used only when non-kinetic measures have failed or would reasonably be expected to fail and only using federally approved technologies.
- Legal thresholds. Non-kinetic measures require reasonable suspicion that the drone is operating in a nefarious manner or within prohibited space; kinetic measures require probable cause of the same.
- Training prerequisite. An officer may act only after completing the training required by the New York State Police Superintendent, in addition to any training and certification required by federal law.
- Reporting. Within 48 hours of any mitigation, the employing agency must report it to the Superintendent in a prescribed form (developed prior to effective date), in addition to any federal reporting.
- Rulemaking. The Superintendent must promulgate drone-mitigation rules within six months of the effective date (November 27, 2026), prioritizing the least destructive measures necessary, and may designate areas for testing mitigation measures.
Federal Limits on Drone Mitigation
Section 236 repeatedly conditions the new authority on “federally approved technologies” and compliance with “applicable federal law.” Drones are “aircraft” under federal law, so physically disabling or destroying one can violate the federal aviation law; signal-based measures such as jamming or spoofing implicate the Federal Communications Act and Federal Communications Commission (FCC) restrictions; and interception or takeover can implicate federal wiretap laws. Historically, only certain federal agencies could lawfully conduct counter-drone mitigation. The SAFER SKIES Act, enacted as part of the FY 2026 National Defense Authorization Act, created the first pathway for state and local law enforcement to obtain counter-drone mitigation authority – but only under federal conditions, including training and certification through the U.S. Department of Justice, use of approved technologies, a credible threat determination, and reporting.1 Implementing federal regulations are still being finalized, and in the interim non-federal agencies have generally participated only through federal task force deputization.
What You Need to Know: Even with this new law, mitigation – especially kinetic measures and radio-frequency jamming – remains gated by federal law, certification and approved-technology requirements. Unauthorized action can potentially expose officers and your agency to federal criminal and civil liability. Before implementing any mitigation capability, consult applicable legal counsel, confirm federal certification status, and align with both the forthcoming State Police rules and the federal framework.
1The SAFER SKIES Act was enacted as part of the FY 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (signed December 2025). It extends counter-drone mitigation authority to qualified state, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement, contingent on training and certification through the U.S. Department of Justice (via the FBI’s National Counter-UAS Training Center) and use of approved technologies.
Part IV: Procurement – The New York State Blue List (Executive Law § 236(6))
The Superintendent must establish a registry, “the New York State Blue List,” of vetted and approved drone vendors that comply with applicable federal requirements. Once the registry is published, the state, its agencies, and municipalities may purchase or lease drones and drone-mitigation technology only from vendors on the list.
What You Need to Know: This restricts where your agency may acquire drones and counter-drone equipment once the list is published. The Blue List should be incorporated into drone procurement workflows, hold pending acquisitions until vendor eligibility can be confirmed, and coordinate with purchasing staff so that any grant-funded buys – including federal counter-drone grant funds – also satisfy the state vendor restriction.