US Governors Call for Federal Action on Drone Security Threats

State Governors Rally for Federal Action on Unmanned Aircraft Systems Threats

The escalating threat posed by unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), commonly known as Drones, has prompted a unified and urgent call to action from state governors across the United States. In recent years, the rapid proliferation of drone technology has exposed critical gaps in the nation’s ability to protect infrastructure, public events, and sensitive facilities from aerial threats. This issue has become a focal point for the National Governors Association (NGA), which has formally urged Congress and federal agencies to strengthen and clarify counter-drone authorities, enhance coordination, and invest in advanced detection and mitigation systems.

The significance of this issue lies in the dual-use nature of drone technology. While drones offer substantial benefits for commerce, emergency response, and innovation, they also present new risks in the hands of malicious actors. Governors are increasingly concerned that state and local agencies lack the legal tools and resources needed to respond effectively to drone incidents. The call for federal action reflects a consensus that the current patchwork of authorities and technical capabilities is insufficient to address the sophisticated and rapidly evolving drone threat landscape.

With drone sightings and incursions on the rise, and the commercial drone market continuing to expand, the challenge is to strike a balance between fostering technological innovation and ensuring public safety. This article examines the evolving threat environment, high-profile incidents driving policy urgency, current federal limitations, state and local needs, legislative responses, industry trends, technical challenges, and broader implications for U.S. security and economic interests.

The Evolving Drone Threat Landscape

Drones have transitioned from niche hobbyist devices to widely accessible tools with applications in photography, agriculture, logistics, and emergency management. However, this accessibility has also enabled actors with malicious intent to exploit drones for surveillance, smuggling, disruption, and even potential attacks. According to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), there are now over 1.1 million registered drones in the United States, with more than 100 drone-related reports submitted each month, including incidents over residential areas, critical infrastructure, and public events.

The NGA and other security experts note that the sophistication of commercially available drones has increased dramatically. Modern drones can carry heavier payloads, operate autonomously, and travel greater distances, making them capable of conducting complex operations. This trend is reflected in the expanding commercial drone market, which is projected to reach $52.51 billion by 2030, highlighting the scale of legitimate use and the corresponding risk of misuse.

States have experienced a wide range of drone incidents, from unauthorized flights over military installations and power plants to attempts to smuggle contraband into correctional facilities. These events underline the vulnerability of critical infrastructure and the urgent need for robust, coordinated countermeasures. The NGA has emphasized that while drones offer many benefits, their misuse poses asymmetric threats that current laws and technologies are ill-equipped to address.

“The sophistication and accessibility of these systems have evolved dramatically, transforming what were once considered recreational devices into potential tools for espionage, terrorism, and criminal activity.”
, National Governors Association

High-Profile Incidents Driving Policy Urgency

Several recent incidents have heightened the sense of urgency among policymakers and the public. In late 2024, a series of mysterious drone sightings over New Jersey and neighboring states triggered multi-agency investigations. Drones were observed flying at night over residential neighborhoods and military facilities, including Picatinny Arsenal and Naval Weapons Station Earle. Despite extensive efforts, authorities were unable to identify the operators or their intentions, highlighting significant detection and response challenges.

Another notable event involved the temporary closure of New York Stewart International Airport after drone activity was reported in the vicinity, causing operational disruptions and raising concerns about aviation safety. Similarly, at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio, airspace was shut down due to drone sightings, demonstrating the potential for drones to disrupt military and civilian operations alike.

Beyond these, the attempted use of a drone to attack an electric substation in Nashville, Tennessee, in 2024 underscored the risk of drones being weaponized for terrorism. Authorities intervened before the plot could succeed, but the incident illustrated the evolving threat landscape and the potential for drones to inflict real harm on critical infrastructure.

“The reported sightings highlighted ‘the insufficiency of current authorities’… underscored the limitations of existing legal and technological frameworks for addressing drone-related incidents.”
, Joint statement by FBI and DHS

Current Federal Authorities and Their Limitations

The legal framework for countering drone threats in the U.S. is fragmented and limited. Only a small number of federal agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), currently possess authority to detect, track, and mitigate rogue drones. These authorities are periodically renewed and are set to expire in September 2025 unless Congress acts to extend them.

Legal constraints hinder the use of effective counter-drone technologies, as many tools for intercepting or disabling drones could violate existing laws, such as those prohibiting the destruction of aircraft or interception of communications. The FBI has conducted 69 operational counter-drone missions since 2019, detecting over 1,000 unlawful drones, but acknowledges that its resources are insufficient to cover the tens of thousands of events and facilities at risk each year.

State and local agencies, which are often closest to the sites of drone incidents, lack explicit authority to deploy counter-drone measures. This creates a disconnect between where threats occur and where response capabilities exist, leaving many facilities vulnerable and dependent on federal intervention that may not arrive in time.

State and Local Government Needs and Challenges

Governors and local officials have repeatedly stressed the need for expanded legal authority and resources to address drone threats. The NGA’s advocacy highlights that state and local agencies are on the front lines of public safety and infrastructure protection but lack the ability to take direct action against rogue drones. This situation is particularly acute for correctional facilities, power plants, and large public events, where the threat of drone incursions is both persistent and evolving.

New York Governor Kathy Hochul and other state leaders have called on Congress to grant states the authority to detect and mitigate drone threats, especially in coordination with federal agencies. The NGA has also emphasized the need for clear legal frameworks, robust training, and financial support to ensure that expanded authorities are implemented safely and effectively.

Resource constraints remain a significant barrier. Developing and maintaining counter-drone capabilities requires substantial investment in technology, training, and ongoing operations. Many state and local agencies operate under tight budgets and face competing priorities, making federal support crucial for effective implementation.

“The coalition of law enforcement and corrections agencies advocating for expanded counter-drone authorities has emphasized that federal delegation of counter-drone powers must be accompanied by appropriate funding and support mechanisms to enable effective implementation.”

Legislative and Policy Responses

Congress has responded to the growing concern with several legislative initiatives. The Counter-UAS Authority Security, Safety, and Reauthorization Act, for example, seeks to renew and expand current authorities while enabling pilot programs for state, local, tribal, and territorial agencies. The Senate recently extended DHS and FBI counter-drone powers through September 2025, reflecting bipartisan support for maintaining and enhancing these capabilities.

House appropriations for fiscal year 2025 include $15 million for counter-UAS research and development, as well as additional funds for portable detection systems and training. These investments indicate a recognition that technological advancement and operational readiness go hand in hand.

Executive actions have also played a role. Recent executive orders have established task forces to review regulatory frameworks and promote domestic drone industry development, while emphasizing the need for security and competitive advantage in the global market.

Industry, Market, and Technical Developments

The counter-drone technology sector is experiencing rapid growth, driven by both government and private sector demand. The global counter-UAS market was valued at $5.2 billion in 2024 and is projected to reach between $13 and $15 billion by 2032, depending on the analysis. This growth reflects a broad recognition of the need for effective detection, identification, and mitigation solutions.

Technological advances include radio frequency jammers, GPS spoofers, high-power microwave systems, and AI-enabled multi-sensor fusion platforms. Companies like Hidden Level have attracted significant investment, over $100 million in one year, to develop innovative detection and tracking systems. These technologies are increasingly being adopted by Airports, sports venues, and critical infrastructure operators.

Despite these advances, technical and operational challenges remain. Urban environments, electromagnetic spectrum management, and the risk of false positives complicate detection and response. Additionally, regulatory compliance with FAA and FCC rules can limit the deployment and effectiveness of counter-drone systems.

“The industry response has encompassed development of diverse technological approaches… focusing increasingly on artificial intelligence-enabled multi-sensor fusion that integrates radar, radio frequency analyzers, optical and infrared cameras, and cloud-based command platforms.”

International and Comparative Perspectives

Other nations have taken varied approaches to balancing drone innovation and security. The European Union has implemented coordinated regulatory frameworks, while recent military conflicts in Ukraine and Israel have provided real-world lessons in both offensive and defensive drone operations.

International cooperation on technology development and intelligence sharing is becoming more important, as drone threats and solutions transcend borders. Export controls and technology transfer policies are also being reconsidered to maintain competitive advantage while supporting allies.

Global incidents, such as the use of drones for espionage or coordinated attacks, have influenced U.S. policy development and underscored the need for adaptive, collaborative approaches that draw from international best practices.

Conclusion

The governors’ collective call for expanded federal action on unmanned aircraft systems marks a pivotal moment in U.S. homeland security policy. As drone technology continues to advance and proliferate, the risks of misuse grow, exposing critical gaps in legal authorities, technical capabilities, and resource allocation. Governors and local officials are clear: without expanded and clarified counter-drone powers, the nation remains vulnerable to threats that are evolving faster than current systems can address.

The path forward requires a coordinated, multi-level response that brings together federal leadership, state and local engagement, sustained investment, and ongoing technological innovation. As Congress and federal agencies consider new legislation and policy reforms, the challenge will be to create frameworks that both protect public safety and foster the continued growth of the American drone industry. The ultimate goal is a secure airspace that enables innovation while safeguarding communities and critical infrastructure from emerging aerial threats.

FAQ

What are unmanned aircraft systems (UAS)?
UAS, commonly known as drones, are remotely piloted or autonomous aircraft used for a variety of purposes, including commercial, recreational, and security-related applications.

Why are state governors calling for federal action on drone threats?
Governors are concerned that state and local agencies lack the legal authority and resources to effectively detect and mitigate drone threats, especially as incidents increase in frequency and sophistication.

What legislation is being considered to address drone threats?
Congress is considering several bills, including the Counter-UAS Authority Security, Safety, and Reauthorization Act, which would expand and clarify counter-drone authorities and support pilot programs for state and local agencies.

How is the private sector responding to drone security challenges?
The counter-drone technology market is growing rapidly, with companies developing advanced detection, tracking, and mitigation systems to meet the needs of both government and private sector customers.

What technical challenges exist for counter-drone operations?
Challenges include accurate detection in complex environments, minimizing false positives, integrating with existing security systems, and operating within regulatory constraints.

Sources:
National Governors Association