California Passes 400-Foot Drone Ban for Concerts
California passed a law banning unauthorized drones within 400 feet of large events, raising questions about state versus federal control of airspace.
California has passed a bill to ban unauthorized drone flights near major outdoor events. The state legislature approved AB 2113 on August 27 in a unanimous 76-0 vote, sending it to the governor for signature.
Assembly Bill 2113 prohibits drone operations within 400 feet of an outdoor ticketed entertainment venue or amusement park that can hold 1,000 or more people. Each violation would carry a $500 fine. The bill's sponsor, California Assembly Member Tina McKinnor, said the legislation has backing from the entertainment giant Live Nation. She argues it will protect intellectual property and public safety at events.
McKinnor told DroneLife that because of the current climate in the United States, it is dangerous for people to have drones flying over them, and the goal is to keep people safe since the contents of the drones are unknown.
The legislation explicitly aims to protect major upcoming events. These include the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games, Super Bowl LX, and festivals like Coachella and Stagecoach.
Scope and Exemptions
The bill appears targeted at recreational pilots and those capturing images without authorization. It includes specific exemptions for certain operators. These exemptions cover individuals holding an FAA certificate or waiver for commercial operations, including beyond visual line of sight flights, who are complying with all federal rules.
Other exemptions apply to drones used by first responders and utility workers. Police, firefighters, medical personnel, and employees of transportation agencies or regulated utilities are exempt when conducting official business.
The FAA Pre-emption Debate
Legal experts immediately raised questions about whether the state law conflicts with federal authority. The FAA holds exclusive jurisdiction over the national airspace, creating a potential pre-emption issue.
Mickey Osterreicher, general counsel for the National Press Photographers Association, called it a serious question. He stated that AB 2113 raises a serious federal pre-emption question because Congress has entrusted the FAA with regulating aviation safety and use of the national airspace. He noted the bill regulates airspace where the FAA itself has not imposed a restriction, potentially barring lawful journalistic drone use.
Aviation attorney Katie Inman of Holland & Knight described the legal landscape as murky. She specializes in federal transportation and drone law. Inman said the FAA certainly has broad authority, but to the extent that means its authority is exclusive depends on a couple of open questions.
She explained that the FAA and U.S. Department of Transportation have acknowledged state and local police power for certain measures. The legality hinges on the statute's purpose, such as preventing trespass or protecting critical infrastructure. Inman concluded that it is a little murkier than it used to be and not a clear line.
National Trend of State Laws
AB 2113 is part of a broader trend. State legislatures across the country have recently proposed various drone restrictions. Advocates in California contend the state has the authority to protect people and property from unwanted drone flights overhead.
Assembly Member McKinnor expressed confidence, saying they have checked with their legal experts and believe they are right as a state, and that it is not going to conflict with the FAA. The final decision on that conflict may rest with the courts if the law is challenged.
