▶ 0:17:24Chair Risch: Normally we don't start without senator durbin being here but he's busy in another committee and will come along later. I have his permission to move ahead. Thank you offer for coming. Today's hearing will highlight the challenges faced by state and local law enforcement when they encounter drones that pose threats to their own public safety.
▶ 0:17:55Chair Risch: In 2018, most of us serving on this committee including the senator and ranking member durbin voted to grant advanced counter-unmanned aircraft systems authority the department of justice and homeland security for public data functioned.
▶ 0:18:17Chair Risch: These authorities have been temporarily extended a time which is a testament to their importance.
▶ 0:18:35Chair Risch: The counter drug authority granted to the department of justice and dhs in 2018 left state and local law enforcement out of this framework, but the threats that local law enforcement faces are very much the same.
▶ 0:18:51Chair Risch: As the threat of dangerous drug use continues to expand and evolve, congress must find a way to equip law enforcement with the vital tools while serving civil liberties. These principles are not incompatible.
▶ 0:19:10Chair Risch: Notably, the drone industry itself has been asking for clear rules and responsibly deployed counter drone authorities by state adn local law enforcement for several years now. Safer skies are better for everyone, including even amateur drone hobbyists.
▶ 0:19:36Chair Risch: Over the years, congress hazard a lot from federal government on this issue, but today we are going to hear from our state law enforcement officials telling us their part of the story. The law enforcement professionals here today have unique perspectives on some of the most pressing challenges when it comes to criminal use of drones.
▶ 0:20:06Chair Risch: These include correctional facilities, organized crime groups, bombarding people with contraband like dangerous weapons, drugs, cell phones and tools. Forced prisons to lock down at the expense of those who seek rehabilitation and other programming while serving their sentences.
▶ 0:20:39Chair Risch: Drones are also a massive threat at our southern border where cartels use them to conduct surveillance of U.S. law enforcement this smuggle dangerous drugs into our communities and as weapons of war.
▶ 0:21:00Chair Risch: We can't wait until a creative criminal or terrorist succeeds in mash casualty attacks before congress acts, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure and federal law enforcement can't be everywhere all at once. But expanding law enforcement authorities must come to oversight and accountability.
▶ 0:21:27Chair Risch: Our witnesses today will tell you and our committee that they are not afraid of oversight or accountability, they are already taking oats to defend the constitution as well as their committees. I will play a one minute video displaying some of the creative and disturbing ways that criminals use drones.
▶ 0:21:56Chair Risch: As it currently stands, there's very little our state and local law enforcement professionals can do about them, and that needs to change, and that is why we are having this hearing. You start the television? >> drones. >> drugs and other contraband. >> U.S. law enforcement officials could not immediately quantify the number of drones or the amount of drugs encountered.
▶ 0:22:24Chair Risch: >> cartels authorized the use of weaponized drones, explosives against td personnel and U.S. law enforcement down at the southern border. >> you can quite literally see a bomb dropped from this drone and actually make contact down there. >> in recent years drones have become a popular contraband to prisons.
▶ 0:22:49Chair Risch: >> drones operated by mexican drug cartels that are observing U.S. military personnel along the border. >> so they are warning now that they might be using is weaponized drones against U.S. personnel.
▶ 0:23:23Chair Grassley: Now, if senator durbin wants to give his opening statement when he gets here, I will call on him at that time. He was going to introduce his witness to do that, is that right? Our first witness is captain wilson.
▶ 0:23:53Chair Grassley: Captain wilson joined the texas department of public safety in 1993. Captain wilson is the texas ranger division unmanned aircraft system program coordinator. Currently the texas department of public safety has approximately 402 aircraft's, 384 pilots.
▶ 0:24:21Chair Grassley: The ranger division that captain wilson coordinates has approximately 67 U.S. pilots and 108 U.S. aircraft. Captain wilson is uniquely qualified to discuss the growing drone threat along the border.
▶ 0:24:42Chair Grassley: Next is senator sergeant robert dooley.sergeant counter-U.S. coordinator with florida highway patrol. Sergeant dooley has more than 43 years of service as a florida state trooper and led the florida highway patrol last program since its inception.
▶ 0:25:09Chair Grassley: Sergeant dooley has a broad range of experience that includes working with other partner agencies at the local, state, interstate and federal levels as well as state attorneys and other community state. Finally, we have president ricky dixon. Mr.
▶ 0:25:37Chair Grassley: Dixon serves as secretary of florida's department of corrections and is also currently serving as president of the american correctional association. Mr. dixon began his career in corrections in 1996. Throughout his early career he served as a correctional officer , colonel of the florida state prison, and warden at three separate correctional institutions. In 2021, Mr.
▶ 0:26:05Chair Grassley: Dixon was appointed the secretary of the department of corrections. He is widely recognized as a correctional subject matter expert. Introduction of minority witnesses. I first like to welcome jennifer daskal. Mrs. daskal is partnered with the preventable cyber security team.
▶ 0:26:35Chair Grassley: She recently served during the biden administration as deputy homeland security advisor, principal deputy legal advisor the national security council, and acting general counsel for the department of homeland security. I also welcome laura donahue, professor of law georgetown university law center and faculty director of georgetown center national security.
▶ 0:27:04Chair Grassley: She's a recognized expert in national security and privacy, technology and constitutional law. Now I would like to do what we customarily do by swearing in the teens, so would you please rise? I'd like to administer the south.
▶ 0:27:30Chair Grassley: Do you swear that the testimony you are about to give before this committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god? I have seen a positive response from all of you. Thank you very much. Now we will go from my left to my right so we will start with Mr. wilson. Captain wilson.
▶ 0:27:56Mr. Wilson: Good morning, chairman grassley, thank you for inviting you to testify before you today. I'm a staff captain with the texas rangers with the department of public safety. My responsibility also include overseeing drone operations within the texas ranger division. Texas ranger division has been operating ua s on the texas-mexico border since 2019.
▶ 0:28:24Mr. Wilson: Currently, each week we are sending four special operations group teams to the border. Each team is supported by two men. We've operated along the border from el paso to brownsville and these teams work very closely with U.S. border patrol and their operations. When we started this in 2019 there was very little ua s used by criminal organizations. But the ground counter surveillance was substantial.
▶ 0:28:53Mr. Wilson: Currently they still maintain their ground counter surveillance of law enforcement personnel at all levels. In the past that attempts trying to crash their drones into our drones. We've had their drones hovering above our helicopters. Our helicopters are about 1100 feet and the drone would be about that just watching.
▶ 0:29:21Mr. Wilson: We have seen it used to surveilled where law enforcement is and is not on the border, and most recently about a month ago, one of our drones was mitigated by the cartel. Transnational criminal organizations use unmanned aircraft along the texas-mexico border.
▶ 0:29:46Mr. Wilson: These organizations are increasingly leveraging ua as technology for intelligence purposes which enabled them to exploit more security operations. Over the past 12 months from april of 2024 to april of 2025, texas dps own centers have identified 122 identified 1216 U.S. border incursions. We know this is a fraction of the actual number but alarmingly nearly half of these are reaching altitudes between 600 and 1800 feet above ground level.
▶ 0:30:17Mr. Wilson: Typical altitude range for border patrol helicopters. The increasing presence of U.S. operations of man aviation introduces the possibility of collusion, -- collisions, endangering personnel equipment. It is critical for border security operations that endanger lives, underscoring the urgent need for enhancement, detection and mitigation systems.
▶ 0:30:44Mr. Wilson: Their favorites with intimate operations, unauthorized drones undermines critical efforts to maintain control to monitor the region. Taken together these threats underscore the urgent need for congress to grant authority to state and local law enforcement agencies to operate robust detection mitigation strategies. To counter the threat of drones and ensure the safety and security. The existing centers owned are limited in scope.
▶ 0:31:13Mr. Wilson: This means they make up about 80% of the market and the 12 sensors covered just 14% of the 1200 mile stretch of the texas-mexico border. This illustrates the urgent need to expand coverage both in terms of geography and the variety. Addressing these threats requires comprehensive approaches to identify potential ua s threats promptly and accurately.
▶ 0:31:41Mr. Wilson: While mitigation strategies must be implement it with precision to men must collateral damage, surgical mitigation techniques are essential to him and mize the risk without compromising public safety or causing unintended disruptions. Above all, we all understand that when you encounter ua s detection mitigation policy, the practice must abide by any applicable state and federal laws and aligned with the first and fourth amendments.
▶ 0:32:07Mr. Wilson: Texas dps and other law enforcement agencies face constraints imposed by the federal government that limit the scope of action needed to address the growing threat. State and local agencies need the ability to mitigate criminal ua s along the border, and near correctional facilities and prisons. On behalf of the text department of safety we urge congress to take action to address this issue. Thank you.
▶ 0:32:36Chair Grassley: Ms daskal?
▶ 0:32:41Mrs. Daskal: Thank you for inviting me to testify on the safety and security of american for the potential misuse of drones. Disclaimer, I am a partner and former deby homeland security advisor, but I'm testifying solely in my personal capacity, not on behalf of the client and not on behalf of any administration. I will also start with the bottom line.
▶ 0:33:06Mrs. Daskal: Drones serve key public safety recreational and commercial functions, and it is absolutely essential that we do everything possible to support the domestic drone industry, including their ability to test. But as we've already heard, drones can also be weaponized by malicious actors and used carelessly in ways that interfere with lawfully present aircraft and put americans at risk. We need congressional action to protect americans from the potential misuse of drones.
▶ 0:33:37Mrs. Daskal: The bipartisan legislation introduced by senators peters and ron johnson including most recently as an amendment to the national defense authorization act in 2025 is, in my view, the place to start. Drone safety issues rose to prominence during the last two months of 2024 when there were numerous reports of drones flying over new jersey.
▶ 0:34:01Mrs. Daskal: At the time I with the deby homeland security advisor, fbi, department of homeland, and there was an attempt to determine what was happening and support local officials. Subject to the limits of current authorities. They did not find any evidence of malicious activity. Instead, it turns out that many of the reported drone settings were aircraft and helicopters. Others were lawfully present drones.
▶ 0:34:33Mrs. Daskal: In early january 2025 for trump administration reached a similar conclusion. At the present conveyed to his press secretary "the drones that were flying over new jersey in large numbers were authorized. This was not the enemy." but at the time, the fear was palpable and it was justified. The risk of drones being weaponized by malicious actors is real and the federal government lacks sufficient authority and resources to address these threats.
▶ 0:35:00Mrs. Daskal: Just last week on may 13, the department of justice arrested a 19-year-old for planning to conduct a mass shooting at a michigan military base on behalf of isis. On the day of the arrest, also the plant day of the attack, the 19-year-old had already launched a surveillance drone in support of the attack.
▶ 0:35:21Mrs. Daskal: One need only glance at the headlines regarding ukraine and the middle east to know how easy it is to purchase off-the-shelf drone technologies and equip them with deadly weapons. And even nonmalicious uses of drones including the careless flying of drones into protective airspace poses a significant risk to aviation security.
▶ 0:35:45Mrs. Daskal: Currently just four federal agencies, the department of justice, homeland security, defense and energy have authority to engage in advanced detection and mitigation measures to protect americans from these. State, local, tribal and territorial officials do not have the authority to do so, to protect their communities from the misuse of drones. They are wholly dependent on limited federal support.
▶ 0:36:12Mrs. Daskal: In april 2022 the prior administration and recognition of the current vulnerabilities admitted to congress a proposal that would expanded the authorities of some actors who would respond to the misuse of drones. The key elements of that proposal are also included in the bipartisan legislation offered by senator peters and senator johnson, and I urge congress to support. The legislation would do three key things.
▶ 0:36:37Mrs. Daskal: First it would expand the authority to detect and mitigate threats to airports, critical infrastructure, and public gatherings. Second, it would give state and local law enforcement officials as well as airport and critical infrastructure owners authorities to engaged in the 10th -- advanced detection measures. Third, it would create a limited pilot subject to oversight and review that would give trained state and local officials the authority to mitigate the threats.
▶ 0:37:08Mrs. Daskal: This is a critical element of any effort to provide sufficient protection to the american people, given limited federal resources. The legislation also includes important safety protections and protections for civil rights and civil liberties. We were very lucky that the 2024 reported savings -- sightings in new jersey turned out to be a false alarm but next time we might not be so lucky, and I urge congress to act. Thank you, I look forward to your questions.
▶ 0:37:39Chair Grassley: Mr. dooley.
▶ 0:37:41Mr. Dooley: Good morning, everyone. And sergeant robert dooley and they serve as a statewide coordinator for the florida highway patrol. I'm also proud to represent not only the state of florida, florida highway patrol, but I also served in other capacities as well.
▶ 0:37:59Mr. Dooley: I'm an faa safety team member which is the educational arm of the faa, the director of public safety for the association of unaccrued vehicle systems international florida chapter. We started the group in florida. I can co-opt cap -- coordinating with law enforcement and fire and I also sit on the aviation committee.
▶ 0:38:26Mr. Dooley: Today we are here to talk about the critical importance of drone detection and mitigation for public safety. As unmanned aircraft sysms continue to proliferate across recreational, commercial and other domains, the of the a public safety agencies to detect and threatening drones has become a national imperative. This statement outlines the growing threat and landscape associated with drones, discusses the current challenges in detecting and mitigation advocates for urgent integration of capabilities with a public safety framework.
▶ 0:38:57Mr. Dooley: The rapid evolution and accessibility of drone technology has transformed industries and revolutionized emergency response in public safety operations. However with this growth comes the increasing threat of misuse, whether intentional or through negligence. From contraband drops over prison yards to surveillance of cricket infrastructure and interruptions of emergency scenes, public safety agencies now face a complex airspace risk.
▶ 0:39:22Mr. Dooley: The ability to detect, track, identify and when necessary mitigate robe drones is essential for protecting lives and preserving critical infrastructure and ensuring operational integrity. Drones prevent -- present a unique set of challenges. Criminal exploitation, whether they are smuggling drugs, weaponizing contraband into correctional facilities and across the border. I've physically been present at the texas border.
▶ 0:39:49Mr. Dooley: We've been serving out there for 2.5 years and I've seen some of the things that they've described. Terrorists and nonstate actors who have experimental drones for surveillance and weaponization with low-cost, low detection threats. In caracas, two drones were weaponized to go after a serving member, both were unsuccessful but you can see how easy it was for them to do that. Privacy violations and harassment.
▶ 0:40:16Mr. Dooley: Drones can be used to stalk, harass, or violate the privacy of civilians or law-enforcement officers often in ways that are difficult to detect or prevent. Interference with public safety operations. Unauthorized drones flying your traffic crashes which is what we saw in california or disaster zones can impede emergency response, creating hazardous conditions are both responders and civilians.
▶ 0:40:41Mr. Dooley: Most recently we had a horrific car crash where the helicopter service that comes to transport patients couldn't take off because there was a robe drone hovering over the helicopter and it created a huge hazard. The need for detection and mitigation capabilities, public safety agencies must be able to detect, identify and authorize mitigate threats in real time. Without the capacity agencies operate blindly, increasing the risk to both responders and the public.
▶ 0:41:09Mr. Dooley: Some of the benefits to these capabilities could be situational awareness, threat identification, incident mitigation, etc. The current limitations in legal barriers, despite the urgent need at most state and local tribal territorial and public safety agency lacked the legal authority to mitigate drones and often fatal limitations even detecting them. Only federal incidences -- agencies protect us, leaving a gap in homeland security at the local level.
▶ 0:41:39Mr. Dooley: Additionally, technology access systems are costly, complex and often limited to military or federal use. Interagency coordination and the lack of real-time data sharing and standard operational procedures hinders unified responses when we are working with our federal and state partners and local partners and policy gaps exist in federal laws including faa prevention airspace regulation complicate the roles and responsibilities of our agencies.
▶ 0:42:04Mr. Dooley: Moving forward, we are asking for legislative reform to grant, did controlled ua s authority by vetted and trained entities under federal oversight and as proposed legislation effort before, training and standardization, technology deployment, non-kinetic drone detection systems, local agencies, particularly those responsible for critical infrastructure and also encourage public and private collaboration with industry to figure out what technology would
▶ 0:42:36Mr. Dooley: Be appropriate to use and crafted to our specific engagement, probably one of the most important ones. The ability to detect and mitigate robe drones is no longer a futuristic concept. Public safety professionals stand on the front lines and their lack of capabilities least a critical vulnerability in our.
▶ 0:43:00Mr. Dooley: The federal agencies play a vital role in powering state and local responders with the tools, training and authority to protect communities from aerial threats. It's the next essential set in securing the homeland. That is it, and I look forward to your questions.
▶ 0:43:20Mrs. Donohue: Thank you for inviting me to today's hearing. You asr part of our daily lives. Agriculture, construction, sports broadcasting, film production and myriad other peaceful purposes. They act as first responders, artistic expression. You asr also can be levied by state and nonstate actors for nefarious purposes. They carry drugs, guns, bombs, flamethrowers. They can be outfitted with tracking technologies enhanced by biometric identification.
▶ 0:43:50Mrs. Donohue: A thomas -- autonomous forms present further challenges. It's important that we have the ability to meet these threats but with congress passes cannot be a blank check. It needs to be carefully drafted take it out of constitutional rights. The law currently raises troubling amendment concerns. Courts have long considered video recording to fall within freedom of speech and the press.
▶ 0:44:16Mrs. Donohue: The right to obtain footage includes the right to record government employees in public space. That ability is one of the primary first and then the names which is to hold government officials accountable. That right is not absolute, but provisions which impact that right cannot burden substantially more speech than is necessary to further the government's legitimate interests. The statute on its face violates this test. There are no limits on the government facilities.
▶ 0:44:46Mrs. Donohue: There's no requirement for distance from the facility, the direction of travel, or whether the drones over private property. There is no showing that must be made about specific targets. Permissions can be used to prevent media coverage on matters of great importance to the electorate. It has already occurred. The guidelines detailing coverage facilities are similarly troubling.
▶ 0:45:07Mrs. Donohue: To determine whether activities constitute a credible threat, seven possibilities are offered, some of which such is the reason to believe that you may ask could harm a person or damage property is true of all drones. Six of the seven have no nexus to any facility, and any interference in the execution of government activity counts potentially including lawful protest.
▶ 0:45:30Mrs. Donohue: Further, to satisfy the requirement of the facility be connected to an authorize initiative the guidelines include any national security event which is defined as a designated event that by virtue of its political, economic, social or religious significance may be the target of terrorists or other criminal activity. All of those are core first amendment protected activities. The right to petition moreover applies to all three branches and promotes continual active political engagement.
▶ 0:46:01Mrs. Donohue: Courts use and experience and logic test to determine whether there is a qualified right of public access. The law allows the government to forbid access to all federal facilities without regard to its historical use. On the fourth and fifth amendments, one of the most glaring concerns in the language is that it essentially operates as a warrant which is forbidden under the fourth amended.
▶ 0:46:24Mrs. Donohue: A drawing board as a document issued by an official not based on any evidence of wrongdoing that lacks particularity in the person or place to be searched for the records to be seized. At the founding, such document violated the reason of the common law and are unreasonable.
▶ 0:46:45Mrs. Donohue: Current log if the government the authority to access all communications between the operator and the drone, to seize control of all systems, and a search device defined evidence of illegal activity. There is no both, no third party, no probable cause. They act as a warrant. Our drone detection systems share similarities here with criminal law, which compel companies to provide location data from user devices.
▶ 0:47:12Mrs. Donohue: They also lack particularity but unlike the drone provisions, geo-fence warrants involve third-party magistrates, a demonstration of probable cause and a note. Even so, circuits are split. For the fifth circuit, they do. Finally on states rights, control of real property including the airspace above land outside of federally owned property falls in the purview of states. It's reserved to them through the 10th amendment.
▶ 0:47:42Mrs. Donohue: There's nothing in the federal provisions which acknowledges state control over adjacent airspace, much less state rights to operate their own over public property. These deficiencies can be addressed to ensure the government the power to protect against uas while protecting constitutional rights. First congress could require a probable cause warrant to target specific drone to be protective measures subject to exceptions as well as the border exception.
▶ 0:48:09Mrs. Donohue: Congress should institute substantive first amendment protections and third, congress should respect state rights by ensuring that they have drones under 400 feet and exempting staterooms from federal targeting. Thank you.
▶ 0:48:21Chair Grassley: Thank you. Mr. dixon.
▶ 0:48:24Mr. Dixon: First of all, thank you so much for the opportunity to speak on this important issue today. My name is ricky dixon and then secretary of florida's department of corrections and I currently serve as the president of the american correction association. I'm here today representing several thousand officials across this nation who worked tirelessly to maintain order, security and provide rehabilitation within facilities.
▶ 0:48:49Mr. Dixon: I spent nearly three decades in this profession starting as a correction officer and working through the ranks to lead one of the largest prison systems in the united states. I tell you that to say that I know firsthand emerging threats facing our staff, the inmates we house in the public we serve. I'm here today to sound the alarm and make you aware of the growing crisis within our profession. One that calls for immediate action.
▶ 0:49:16Mr. Dixon: The criminal use of unmanned aircraft systems is escalating and we do not have the tools for the legal authority to stop them. These drones are no longer just a nuisance. They are sophisticated weapons for organized crime. Smuggling fentanyl, heroin, razor blades, weapons and contraband cell phones into our facilities with precision.
▶ 0:49:40Mr. Dixon: Each time a drone enters our airspace we are forced to lock down, halting education, job training, drug treatment and mental health programs, programs that reduce recidivism and prepare individuals for success for reintegration into society. Programs you have appropriately supported and given funding for. The consequences are deadly. Drone-delivered narcotics have led to numerous overdose deaths inside our prisons throughout this nation.
▶ 0:50:10Mr. Dixon: It contributes significantly to violence against other inmates and our staff. But make no mistake, this crisis is not just a local issue. It does not end at our facility gates. Contraband cell phones smuggled in by drones are powerful drone tools. From behind bars, inmates are orchestrating drug trafficking, intimidating witnesses, and directing violent crimes in our communities.
▶ 0:50:37Mr. Dixon: Families are being extorted, forced to send money to protect loved ones from harm inside the prison walls. Inmates are being rudely assaultive to serve as examples of what can happen when families don't comply. American prisons are turning into command centers for drug cartels and gang leaders, driving crime well beyond our fences.
▶ 0:51:02Mr. Dixon: It's only a matter of time before a firearm or firearms are dropped in by drones with timing sickness with cell phones so that specific inmates or groups of inmates are in a position to receive them in an effort to take over a facility. All of this happens at a time when staffing shortages are already pushing the workforce to its limits. Officers are working mandatory overtime just to keep operations running.
▶ 0:51:30Mr. Dixon: Adding drone related lockdowns, heighten security demands and emergency services makes their jobs unsustainable. Yet despite the severity of this issue, correctional agencies remain legally prohibited from taking action. Only four federal agencies have the authority to counteract drone threats. Meanwhile state and local corrections facilities are among the most frequently targeted and remain defenseless, waiting for federal intervention, putting lives at risk.
▶ 0:51:59Mr. Dixon: We appreciate legislative votes for pilot programs to test counter drone solutions, but let's be clear, pilot programs alone will not solve this national crisis. The issue requires a comprehensive, scalable and well-regulated legal framework, one that grants correctional and law enforcement agencies the authority for advanced detection and mitigation backed by funding, training, and oversight.
▶ 0:52:28Mr. Dixon: Every authorized drone that enters correctional airspace undermines public safety. Every contraband cell phone delivered by a drone strengthens criminal enterprises. And every lockdown caused by drone activity hinders rehabilitation and destabilizes institutions. We urge you to act, give us the tools, authority and support we need to support this growing threat before it spirals further out of control.
▶ 0:52:54Mr. Dixon: The safety of our correctional facilities, our workforce and our communities depend on it. Without this authority we allow modern technology in a way that undermines justice, facilitate contraband trafficking and jeopardizes lives. Threats the framers never intended the first, fourth, fifth or 10th amendment to shield. I leave you with this. This issue will be addressed eventually, there is no doubt.
▶ 0:53:21Mr. Dixon: The only question is whether we act now with foresight or wait for disaster in an attempt to recover after the fact. Thank you, and I stand ready to take any questions. >> [indiscernible]
▶ 0:53:45Chair Grassley: In finance committee, so I hope someone on my side of the aisle will take over while I'm gone. Captain wilson, in your testimony you mentioned an incident in which texas state law enforcement drone was actually mitigated by a mexican cartel member.
▶ 0:54:06Chair Grassley: Can you please elaborate on the challenge that you face from cartel drones and speak to the safety of the risk of your department by not being able to employ the same technology that cartels has started to use against U.S. law enforcement? Push a button. >> that would help, wouldn't it.
▶ 0:54:37Chair Grassley: In 2019 they would follow us for an hour and a half, two hours back to our hotels from where we were working on the border. People were sitting in a tree or sitting on a fence line. For law enforcement, for federal, state or local law enforcement. Uas has increased significantly since then.
▶ 0:55:08Chair Grassley: I mentioned earlier, they are trying to crash drones, they are hovering over our helicopters at 1500, 1600 feet. In presenting a clear danger to any mandated aviation in that area. In the last month, we were mitigated by the cartels. We are in conversation or communication with U.S. border patrol.
▶ 0:55:39Chair Grassley: They had asked us to see if -- they had an investigation in mexico and ask to see if we could find a pilot for that drone. After a little bit of time we were able to locate that pilot and follow him.
▶ 0:55:56Chair Grassley: There was communication with mexico to try to get the government there to respond, and as they were responding and before they got into the area, the criminal drone came down and departed the area.
▶ 0:56:13Chair Grassley: We continued to stay with the pilot and his copilot, if you will, to eventually our drone lost connection and was mitigated by the cartel as we found out later and crashed about 1000 feet away from where the mitigation took place.
▶ 0:56:33Chair Grassley: Thank you for that. Sergeant dooley, you and your office provide support for federal law enforcement at mass gatherings and during protected operations. I'd like to have you elaborate on your role providing support and explain how advanced cover uas authorities would better enable you to support federal partners.
▶ 0:56:56Mr. Dooley: That's a huge request we get. In most cases are federal partners are much more sophisticated than what we are allowed to use, but it is still abuse. That is the number one question I get when they ask or help. We are using our equipment to help them with their detection, can we mitigate? And of course my response is no, we can't do that.
▶ 0:57:22Mr. Dooley: They have a desperate need for a force multiplier to support from the state, especially when we had our federal partners who rotate in and out from certain details. They are not the same people over and over again, so when they come down and they are not terribly familiar, we educate them on what our capabilities are and how we are supporting. Over and over again, you help us mitigate? No, we cannot.
▶ 0:57:47Mr. Dooley: Our technology is, we don't get into hacking and all those things. But again, it still helps, just not on a level that they can perform those same duties. But it is to request that we get for this capability and on top of that I would get faculty from a federal partners as well because most of the requests that are federal partners get can't be fulfilled.
▶ 0:58:11Mr. Dooley: We don't have enough resources and equipment to cover all the requests, and they will call me and again, I can't perform some of the same duties that they can. In some cases it is of no use because what they need specifically is the mitigation for the ability to detect on a higher level than what we are able to provide.
▶ 0:58:29Chair Grassley: Mr. dixon, and your testimony you mentioned the dangers of drone-delivered contraband like weapons and cell phones entering into prisons. Elaborate on the threat of contraband cell phones and prison security.
▶ 0:58:46Mr. Dixon: Sure. Cell phones and drones combined are a few of the most critical we have right now. The irony is drones deliver cell phones and the very cell phones that are delivered are what is used to coordinate additional drone deliveries. Everything bad that happens in a prison usually starts with a conversation.
▶ 0:59:10Mr. Dixon: So if we intercept or prevent the cell phones that are delivered by drones, we produce a significant amount of the violence. As I mentioned in my testimony, cell phones are used to extort families, to maintain criminal networks on the street. As I mentioned, prisons in some cases have cartels because they continue their criminal enterprises.
▶ 0:59:35Mr. Dixon: If we eliminate cell phones and drive communication back to our state systems, we have sophisticated tools to monitor that system, whether it be our tablets or institutional phone systems. But when they circumvent that through cell phones, it is one of the major issues we have to combat.
▶ 0:59:52Chair Grassley: Thank you, senator durbin?
▶ 0:59:56Sen. Durbin: I apologize for coming in late. I have another hearing in appropriations with secretary kennedy, sorry I missed the opening. Special thanks to our witnesses that I was not here to introduce.
▶ 1:00:14Sen. Durbin: So I'm sure most of this -- most of us were watching the cubs/sox field and wrigley field and I was shocked by the fact that they were doting on the capacity they had with the drone to show images of wrigley field from angles and perspectives never known before. It was beautiful and the cubs won so it was a good day all around. But it raised a question in my mind I want to depose to several members of the panel here.
▶ 1:00:43Sen. Durbin: If I were sitting in wrigley field with a friend or my granddaughter and I saw a drone overhead, I would not be sure it was a safe and friendly drone. I don't know that when I'm sitting there. Somebody has to find out or at least ask the question.
▶ 1:01:01Sen. Durbin: With over one million drones in the country today, drones possibly hovering over fields of sports and things, it raises the question of who is going to monitor that activity to make sure these are safe vehicles that don't endanger anyone. At the same time those drones could be gathering information. There is a privacy angle there.
▶ 1:01:31Sen. Durbin: Who is protecting the privacy of the people that they are broadcasting and getting information on? So I'd like to ask, how do you balance this? The drones over wrigley field, are they friendly or not? The gathering of information in my own backyard, who is protecting me?
▶ 1:01:52Mrs. Donohue: As a matter of large-scale outdoor events, most have laws in place that prohibit the flight of drones over certain large-scale events. They require that there be agreements and consent from the property owner or from the venue owner or some sort of contract in place.
▶ 1:02:13Mrs. Donohue: In terms of how to balance the privacy, most states actually have carveouts saying that others cannot fly drones over private property without the consent of the property owners themselves, because owing to this ancient doctrine, property owners only adjacent airspace over their land. And so they have the right to exclude drones.
▶ 1:02:34Chair Grassley: Let's talk about the practical world. You got air traffic controllers monitoring commercial aircraft's , but in terms of monitoring actual drone activity, to the point of knowing whether it is complying with the state law and if it is not, what to do about it, what is the answer there?
▶ 1:02:52Mrs. Donohue: Anything within 400 feet is within the state domain.
▶ 1:02:57Sen. Durbin: How was that enforced?
▶ 1:02:59Mrs. Donohue: Through state monitoring. If you need a temporary flight restriction over particular areas as during, for instance, the super bowl. In this case is the way to balance the civil liberties concern is to make sure that there are restrictions. For instance, you don't extend super bowl coverage for a month and you don't extend it over any land or any drone anywhere in the country but it has to be a drone that is actually adjacent to that particular site.
▶ 1:03:26Mrs. Donohue: So when the federal government is involved, if there's the potential for the federal government to take down a drone or to interfere in its operation or to conduct a search of the divisive south, then there needs to be some nexus to the actual open air facility or the place that is trying to be protected.
▶ 1:03:40Sen. Durbin: Mr. donahue, could they permit government authorities to intercept data or indication in violation of the fourth amendment?
▶ 1:03:51Mrs. Donohue: Yes.
▶ 1:03:52Sen. Durbin: Thank you for that. Mr. chairman.
▶ 1:04:00Chair Grassley: Senator lee.
▶ 1:04:03Senator Lee: Angst to each of you for being here. In the last 15 years or so, drones have become increasingly a part of our lives. They think use not only by the military, by law enforcement, by immigration authorities, but also by businesses, hobbyists and other kinds of enthusiasts. Yet in some instances, drones can present grave threats. Pretty dire threats.
▶ 1:04:29Senator Lee: Meanwhile the current regulatory framework creates a problem insofar as it inhibits state and local law enforcement from addressing those same threats that can be uniquely posed by drones. That's why I introduced a bill called the shield you act, stopping harmful incidents to enforce lawful drone use.
▶ 1:04:51Senator Lee: This legislation once enacted will help state and local law enforcement by giving them authority on a limited, constrained basis that they need in order to protect their citizens and their communities. From those who use drone technology for harm. Let's start with you. You testified about the limitations imposed by federal law that effectively prohibits state and local law enforcement.
▶ 1:05:22Senator Lee: In fact, expressly prohibits them from effectively utilizing counter drone, counter-uis systems. This bill that I refer to list some of those restrictions. How would passing that bill and granting limited counter-uas capabilities enhance state and local law enforcement and your ability to protect the public?
▶ 1:05:49Mr. Dooley: Number one, we do need some significant oversight, we need accountability, we need training. Someone like me shouldn't exist where I had to figure out on my own -- >> well, you should exist.
▶ 1:06:03Mr. Dooley: There shouldn't be some set of training where we can identify that but it would be controlled. How would you mitigate something? Why would you even set up a system in the first place in a particular location? Why are you here, what are you going to do? If you see a drone in the airspace are you just detecting that it is there or is it a threat?
▶ 1:06:27Mr. Dooley: But the bill would dramatically increase our ability to keep critical infrastructure, vips, other sporting events a lot safer and when you see a drone flying over the cubs game, is it friend or foe? That is what we would like to do. Not necessarily interfering, regulated what is being detected.
▶ 1:06:50Mr. Dooley: It's not great, it's hard to detect at times because every drone broadcast slightly differently but if you were doing standard detection or something of that nature where it is only picking up what type of drone and the serial number, its net telling you anything about the operator or the person operating. Nothing personal. We still have to follow the legal process to get that information. I think it would be of great use and of great help the public safety if used in the proper way.
▶ 1:07:15Sen. Lee: That's a great point and I like the way you phrased it. It reminds me of an analogy, the unarmed english bobby who being unarmed upon seeing the commission of the crime yells stop or yells stop again. But if you can't do more than that, there are going to be problems. Captain wilson, you've highlighted the need for counter-uas capabilities near the border.
▶ 1:07:44Sen. Lee: If state and local law enforcement capabilities were unleashed, how would law enforcement efforts at the border be improved correspondingly to that? Or as a result of that, I should say.
▶ 1:08:01Sen. Lee: >> it would allow us law enforcement at all levels to work closer together, to identify those locations that we should have a sensor and based on activity that is going on, it would keep us and the community safer, being able to detect and if necessary, mitigate.
▶ 1:08:29Sen. Lee: When drones are detected overhead of a correctional facility, what are the security protocols that you go through when you see it? >> it's quite extensive. He locked the compound down for hours, weeks, days, depending on the payload we discover. Significant consequences occur between gangs and different inmates in the institution if the payload doesn't make it to its intended target. It's a dangerous situation.
▶ 1:09:00Sen. Lee: Wait a minute, that doesn't compromise your the to operate facilities in a manner that is effective and safe.
▶ 1:09:10Mr. Dixon: It absolutely does and stops all the functions of your supposed to carry out. We put them on pause at a time we already are having a difficult staffing situation. I do want appreciation for senator durbin. I do think there is a differentiation to be made between our environment and the prison setting vs. The citizenry. There is no reasonable expectation of privacy for those people.
▶ 1:09:41Mr. Dixon: So we are simply asking for that when drones enter our airspace to be able to deal with them and mitigate the threat at that point.
▶ 1:09:47Sen. Lee: Thank you. Thank you Mr. chairman. >> thank you all, this is been really interesting testimony. There's over one million drones registered with the faa that can be used for some really good stuff. Farmers in minnesota are using them for farm management, civil engineers for surveying. We especially see this in rural areas with everything from train wrecks on, they are incredibly helpful.
▶ 1:10:18Sen. Lee: We also know that the risks, you just brought this up at the correctional institute and I had thought through all that. We know that this privacy concerns, which senator durbin, I know discussed. I just want to start with something that is on my mind a lot, and that is commercial aviation.
▶ 1:10:40Sen. Lee: As you noted in your written testimony, drones accounted for nearly two thirds of near misses with commercial passenger planes which is kind of an extraordinary number. You also noted that airports lack critical authority to protect against drone incursions. We saw what happened in l.a. With the firefighting plane at a time of just critical danger. What authority should congress provide airports and other critical infrastructure operators to ensure they are able to protect the public?
▶ 1:11:11Sen. Lee: >> I share the concerns, particularly around airports and critical infrastructure and as I said in my testimony, I think that the legislation, the bipartisan legislation that was introduced is a really good place to start and it does a couple of things. First, it gives airport owners and critical infrastructure owners new authority to engage in advanced detection measures, which they don't currently have to be able to identify the threats that do arise. That is important.
▶ 1:11:42Sen. Lee: It's also subject to training requirements, to privacy complaint requirements, to the use of technologies that are tested and approved. And secondly, the other piece of this that I also think is critical is ensuring that state and local authorities have the ability to mitigate as appropriate subject to oversight and review.
▶ 1:12:05Sen. Klobuchar: I think I'm a cosponsor that bill. News organizations, you know how we have to protect their right to be able to take photos and the like of disasters so the public knows that. Could you talk about balancing the uses that news organizations have for drones so that they don't interfere with public safety?
▶ 1:12:30Sen. Klobuchar: >> as you know, the faa had the authority to put in place temporary flight restrictions for a range of reasons including safety and security reasons. There's also a process by which media organizations can waivers in the event there are temporary flight restrictions in order to engage in first amendment protected activity until the public is made aware of critical information and that process needs to continue.
▶ 1:12:58Sen. Klobuchar: Sergeant dooley, and your testimony you suggested granting state and local law enforcement limited counter-uas authorities subject to standardized training and certification. There are examples of this across law enforcement. For example, all bomb technicians are trained at the fbi's hazardous advice.
▶ 1:13:24Mr. Dooley: It would have to come from one other federal partners already authorized to do this as they'd have the most experience. Number two, I don't think that everybody necessarily would need this right off the bat. I think there should be some level of credentialing as to different levels of detection and mitigation as well, and we may have a multi tiered approach of someone that just can simply detect and do nothing about it because for whatever reason.
▶ 1:13:51Mr. Dooley: Then you go down the list and you may have more credible infrastructure or maybe a more high-profile target area that may need those additional provisions. For example, just to be a drone pilot I have to get a certificate. I have to register my drone. If I want to drive a car I have to take a driving test. If I want to be a trooper.
▶ 1:14:11Sen. Klobuchar: I got it.
▶ 1:14:12Mr. Dooley: This is no different, I think we could figure it out to different levels. I think one of the four should definitely be the starting point.
▶ 1:14:22Sen. Klobuchar: My last question, you talk about things being smuggled in through c1 you talked about things being smuggled into prisons via drones. Can you talk about the threat to correctional officers and inmates at a facility? Mr.
▶ 1:14:47Dixon: Thank you for the question. Anytime drugs are introduced to the compound, contraband, it increases the threat. I've seen a 98% increase in outside medical trips related to contraband. It is one of the most dangerous things we do is take inmates outside of our fence to hospitals.
▶ 1:15:12Dixon: The violence associated with drugs and contraband coming in has increased exponentially since this became a problem.
▶ 1:15:17Sen. Klobuchar: When the drones breached the perimeter, it is obviously a major threat, but what kind of counter you a.s. Authorities -- au -- uas authorities do need?
▶ 1:15:35Mr. Dixon: We need the ability to mitigate that threat to a greater extent than we do now, to intercept those drones coming over our facility.
▶ 1:15:43Chair Grassley: Thank you. Senator britt.
▶ 1:15:46Senator Britt: Thank you for holding this hearing on this important topic. I hear this from people all across alabama, the lack of drone mitigation authority for state and local law enforcement has become a critical issue. We see it specifically when we are looking at large public gatherings which includes large sporting events, which my state takes great pride in. We want to make sure public safety comes first.
▶ 1:16:14Senator Britt: Even when it comes to federal installations in alabama, it is often state and local law enforcement and personnel who are the closest and most capable of responding. Alabama law enforcement agency, who is headed by secretary hal taylor, who does a tremendous job, they assist federal partners and are likely the first ones to be able to respond and to do it in a meaningful and efficient way.
▶ 1:16:42Senator Britt: Without proper authority, they can't act with the speed and coordination they need in the time of a crisis. I'm going to address this to captain wilson and sergeant hooley. Is there a situation that is as simple as extending existing mitigation authorities to state and local law enforcement that would help in these situations or are there other gaps in the law that need to be considered?
▶ 1:17:07Senator Britt: What should our top priorities be when considering a legislative solution to address this issue?
▶ 1:17:14Mr. Wilson: We looked into it extensively when we started working with federal officers -- partners. Those permissions were granted and cannot be delegated. For example, some to you for programs -- some tfo programs where local law enforcement would be deputized to do U.S. marshals things, we looked into that and we feel the authority could be delegated.
▶ 1:17:39Mr. Wilson: That would have been the simplest approach, deputizing and under your supervision or guidance we would move forward and do this, but we don't think that is correct. I don't know what we would do as a simple solution other than we are in this room trying to figure it out. We have tried to look down some of those legal avenues of doing it correctly. That was what we came up with and they can't delegate those authorities.
▶ 1:18:09Mr. Wilson: Again, like sergeant dooley said earlier, it has to be training, it has to be accountability, it has to be transparency for all the agencies that start. You have to start somewhere with some credentialing of some law enforcement agencies at the appropriate level.
▶ 1:18:31Sen. Britt: Are those things we can be doing right now? What are things we can be doing right now to make sure we are taking proactive steps to be able to allow state and local law enforcement to have this capacity or this ability in the future?
▶ 1:18:50Mr. Dooley: I think right now you should probably establish you would run this at a federal level. Then we start figuring out how we should roll this out and who should be part of the initial rollout and what type of equipment we should be using and what type of process should be in place for standardizing how this is used on a reporting process to wear if I do deploy something and we do mitigate whatever it is, there are multiple kinds of accountability so if I'm right, if I did
▶ 1:19:22Mr. Dooley: Something wrong, we can identify it and either corrected or discipline or whatever the case is. There has to be right or wrong. I think we should identify a federal entity of some sort that should control this moving out toward public safety.
▶ 1:19:37Sen. Britt: Is the training in place now to make these moves?
▶ 1:19:40Mr. Wilson: No.
▶ 1:19:42Mr. Dooley: No.
▶ 1:19:44Sen. Britt: We need to invest in that as well.
▶ 1:19:47Mr. Dooley: Yes.
▶ 1:19:48Sen. Britt: I want to turn to you, secretary dixon. We have seen an increase in alabama like other states and increasing drones flying contraband into prison facilities. It presents a real risk to inmates and officers as well.
▶ 1:20:10Sen. Britt: Based on your experience can you explain to us some of the unique challenges related to drone mitigation when it comes to the correctional setting? And how those should inform us as we are looking at potential legislation.
▶ 1:20:27Mr. Dixon: One of the most significant challenges is they come in and we often don't know they are there. So often, the contraband is delivered and we never saw it coming, so we are defenseless. We have limited systems to help detect when they are coming in but not nearly as advanced as they should be and as the technology is capable to deliver right now if we have the federal authorities we need.
▶ 1:20:56Mr. Dixon: Not to be melodramatic, but I would encourage us to act with the same sense of urgency that we would've we were watching on the news right now that multiple automatic weapons were just delivered into a compound by a drone to gang members and they escaped or harmed or killed other inmates or staff because that is a very likely scenario. That is why we are here today and we are so thankful we are having these discussions.
▶ 1:21:24Sen. Britt: Thank you so much.
▶ 1:21:25Chair Grassley: Senator moody.
▶ 1:21:29Senator Moody: Thank you. Not so often I get to go behind my fellow junior senator. Thank you for holding this hearing and for all of the witnesses for taking time away from your jobs and families to be here in washington, especially to my fellow floridians, very proud of you. Thank you for representing the great free state of florida.
▶ 1:21:58Senator Moody: Act with a sense of urgency, I appreciate you saying that. As a mother, I know that what we do right now in this conference -- congress will protect or leave vulnerable many americans including our children. In florida, we are home to many military installations. Certainly we have three combatant commands in our state.
▶ 1:22:23Senator Moody: The sensitivity of what is taking place within the state of florida not only on a military basis and on our space coast. Most of our lunches are done from kennedy space center. We have a lot of sensitive personnel information, movements, command we have a lot of it right in the heart of florida.
▶ 1:22:47Senator Moody: I know that sergeant dooley, you are coordinating the uav program and you assist when there are incursions in military space and violations and you state assets to help with that. I want to thank you for being an expert and your attention on that.
▶ 1:23:04Senator Moody: One of the things I've been trying to highlight and I have passed legislation to do is to stop student visas from the chinese government because they have laws in place right now that require their citizens to gather intelligence and work with the ccp and yet we are importing 300,000 year into the united states. I want to point out an example.
▶ 1:23:29Senator Moody: In august of 2020 one, we allowed in to study one of the students to study at the university of minnesota and particularly thereafter, we were told he was gathering information from military bases.
▶ 1:23:47Senator Moody: On january 18, 20 24, the fbi arrested him in san francisco for operating an unarmed aircraft system in violation of national defense airspace and photographing defense installations. A further investigation found he had taken photographs and used a drone to photograph the naval base in norfolk, virginia. Here on a visa, to study at the university.
▶ 1:24:15Senator Moody: Thankfully, he was finally deported a couple of weeks ago and sent home. Thankfully, we have an administration that is taking these things seriously now. This is a weakness in our espionage act in the sense that we outlaw photographing military bases using drones. In this particular case, they found video on this drone, but they could only charge the photographs.
▶ 1:24:48Senator Moody: We have failed to update our laws. I would ask you, sergeant, is this something that you believe we need to shore up to make sure we can criminally charge when we don't just have foreign agents taking photographs of sensitive military bases and installations, but also video?
▶ 1:25:11Mr. Dooley: Yes, I agree and we have some pretty robust statutes in florida that allow them to have more teeth in the bite when we do have these situations. Two florida statutes which also protect people's rights to privacy, so I completely agree that we should figure something out and make it to where these things can happen.
▶ 1:25:38Sen. Moody: I just want to say, Mr. chairman I'm going to introduce the drone espionage act legislation, which would include, it would strengthen the espionage act of 1917 and include video of sensitive national defense sites as a crime. Including videography, not just photographs. All of the members here have sensitive military sites.
▶ 1:26:06Sen. Moody: Many congressional members have states where folks have come over here on visas. Foreign nationals have been caught videoing sensitive military sites in this country and it has to be a crime and I appreciate the time and I'm sorry I've run out of time and I will leave to the chairman whether he wants to provide additional testimony.
▶ 1:26:26Chair Grassley: Any comment, a last point?
▶ 1:26:30Prof. Donohue: I just wanted to comment on the last point. I also feel drones are national security issue. Thermal imaging, lasers, others sensor technology, it is a gap in my view and it is something that needs to be addressed.
▶ 1:26:48Prof. Donohue: I also just wanted to add the border exception because obviously along the border case law is very strong and showing there is an exception because of national interests within at least 20 miles of the border if it is contiguous with entering and leaving the united states.
▶ 1:27:08Prof. Donohue: The third point is the military sites are the kind of facility that should be subject to these provisions but that is different from every other public facility across the board, which is why that tailoring would matter with exceptions built in for certain sites as well as along the border itself.
▶ 1:27:28Sen. Moody: Thank, Mr. chairman. >> thank you, Mr. chairman. I note that a couple of witnesses have brought a potential first amendment concerns related to drones and monitoring activities. Ms. daskal mentioned specifically she wanted to make sure she was ensuring people could engage in first amendment protected activity. It is this line of question I would like to pursue with you.
▶ 1:27:57Sen. Moody: Did you and your time at dhs co-chair the biden administration's disinformation governance board? >> no, I was not the cochair of the governance board.
▶ 1:28:12Sen. Schmitt: Did you write the charter? >> in my time at dhs, at the time I was the acting general counsel.
▶ 1:28:20Sen. Schmitt: I have a memo hear from you with a couple of things we are going to get into but you wrote the charter, correct? >> as I said, senator, I was in a general counsel role.
▶ 1:28:38Sen. Schmitt: Did you have a role in picking mina janco it's to be the executive director director of the disinformation governance board? >> I was not the hiring authority.
▶ 1:28:47Sen. Schmitt: Did you have input before she became mary poppins? Were you aware she would become the head of the disinformation board? Ms. daskal: I was aware.
▶ 1:29:02Sen. Schmitt: Did you support it?
▶ 1:29:04Ms. Daskal: I'm not going to get into internal conversations.
▶ 1:29:08Sen. Schmitt: How about public documents? Let's just get into the memo that you authored. On january 31, 2022, you authored a memo to the secretary asking him to sign off on the charter.
▶ 1:29:31Sen. Schmitt: In that charter there are a few things you are trying to address to dispel as it relates to misinformation or disinformation relating to the origins and effects of covid-19. Is your position it would have been appropriate for the government to work with social media companies to censor points of view that may be covid-19 originated in china?
▶ 1:29:55Ms. Daskal: Senator, it is my view that it is not appropriate for the government to censor any points of view.
▶ 1:30:03Sen. Schmitt: Literally, you were a part of the disinformation governance board of the united states of america. My contention is the orwellian name of the ministry of truth was already taken, so the disinformation governance board slid right in and he were a big art of this. You wrote the charter.
▶ 1:30:25Sen. Schmitt: You also wanted to censor views and dispel disinformation about the efficacy of masks, another conspiracy theory the government thought it was there responsibility to dispel. I find it kind of rich you are expressing concerns about, first amendment concerns about anything. A federal district court judge said this was the biggest affront to the first amendment in the history of the united states of america, the censorship enterprise that the biden administration that you were a big part of.
▶ 1:30:58Sen. Schmitt: I want to ask you also about that memo attached to the charter. There is a proposed time schedule with twitter for april 28, 2022.
▶ 1:31:12Sen. Schmitt: You were going to meet with twitter executives including yule raw, the head of site integrity to discuss, it is noted that the disinformation governance board and the purpose was for them to become more involved with the analytic. Were you at that meeting?
▶ 1:31:36Ms. Daskal: I do not recall that meeting.
▶ 1:31:39Sen. Schmitt: It turns out twitter became very involved in the efforts.
▶ 1:31:44Ms. Daskal: I was not engaged with twitter on these efforts.
▶ 1:31:47Sen. Schmitt: Will they were engaged in helping to dispel the hunter biden laptop as a russian hack and leak operation. Which was cited, by the way in the charter of things to address. Covid-19 conspiracy theories. I don't have a lot of time and we could do a whole hearing on this.
▶ 1:32:17Sen. Schmitt: But as missouri's attorney general, I'm so familiar with your efforts. I think we would be remiss to not at every point the people who were involved in this, who would trample the ability for people to speak their mind because they shot -- that the government should decide what the truth was. This country was founded on the case that individuals should make up their own minds.
▶ 1:32:48Sen. Schmitt: You want to be ashamed of yourself or your role in this. >> thank you. Senator cornyn?
▶ 1:32:55Senator Cornyn: This topic because the events of july 13, 2024 to come to mind. The attempted assassination of president trump. Where the shooter used a drone in advance of the event to surveilled the area of this
▶ 1:33:25Senator Cornyn: Rally in a place that was supposed to be among the most protected in america. For temporary flight restrictions were in place. The secret service did not have adequate anti-drone technology or the know-how to stop these drones. To me, that demonstrates that nowhere is safe. Mr. dixon, you have made that point several times.
▶ 1:33:54Senator Cornyn: I want to ask captain wilson, thank you for your service to our state over many years. This is a big challenge at the texas mexico border. The department of public safety, the texas rangers, dps has had a lot of experience dealing with border security matters over many years.
▶ 1:34:24Senator Cornyn: Can you give us a sense of the volume or the number of drone encounters that are seen at the border these days? Is this an occasional occurrence? Is it an hourly occurrence? How frequent are the drone incursions?
▶ 1:34:44Mr. Wilson: Thank you, it depends on the location. In a 12 month period, there were 1200 drone incursions that we detected on our sensors. That we knew of. That is an important point to make note of. That is an important point.
▶ 1:35:16Sen. Cornyn: Would it be helpful?
▶ 1:35:19Mr. Wilson: It would be helpful. Utep has a system that is very robust and layered and it will scare you if you look at what flights across the border.
▶ 1:35:33Sen. Cornyn: It strikes me as bizarre that after all these years with all the attention being given to the border to do with border security matters and that now we still lack the capability to know what is coming across the border.
▶ 1:36:01Sen. Cornyn: It is after all an international border governor abbott had to step up in the absence of federal government law enforcement to fill the gap. Every time I been to the border and I been there many times and welcomed many of my colleagues down there so they could learn from the people on the ground, I've always been told by border
▶ 1:36:34Sen. Cornyn: Control to border security is a combination of three things. It is infrastructure, it is boots on the ground, and it is technology. I take it from your testimony that the technology still isn't capable of filling this particular gap?
▶ 1:36:49Mr. Wilson: Yes, sir.
▶ 1:36:51Sen. Cornyn: If you go along the rio grande river in a riverboat that the the department of homeland security has, you will see a number of scouts by the cartels and the coyotes directing the movement of immigrants across the border where they see an opening or opportunity. Is that right?
▶ 1:37:12Mr. Wilson: Yes, sir.
▶ 1:37:14Sen. Cornyn: These drones provide an enhanced ability to defeat the efforts by federal, state and local law enforcement to secure the border.
▶ 1:37:26Mr. Wilson: Yes, sir.
▶ 1:37:28Sen. Cornyn: Let's talk briefly about the scourge of fentanyl. It has taken tens of thousands of lives in america. It showed up in every community through the country. The unfortunate characteristic of fentanyl is it is easy to make from chemical precursors and it is relatively compact and easy to transport do drones currently transport fentanyl across the border?
▶ 1:37:57Mr. Wilson: I'm not aware personally of any, but I'm sure there are and I know there have been those instances where drones and other things have been flown across the border.
▶ 1:38:10Sen. Cornyn: These drones are capable of carrying a significant payload?
▶ 1:38:15Mr. Wilson: Yes, sir.
▶ 1:38:16Sen. Cornyn: To your knowledge, is the transportation of fentanyl across the border combined -- confined to the ports of entry or do they also include the space between the ports of entry? >> we are past time, but I will let you finish.
▶ 1:38:31Mr. Wilson: Between the ports of entry.
▶ 1:38:37Sen. Cornyn: And not between?
▶ 1:38:39Mr. Wilson: Not between.
▶ 1:38:41Sen. Cornyn: There is this strange myth out there that the movement of drones is just across the ports of entry and not between the ports of entry but that is not your experience, is it?
▶ 1:38:51Mr. Wilson: No, sir. >> thank you, senator. Senator kennedy.
▶ 1:39:00Senator Kennedy: Um, the bad guys are using drones. Does anybody disagree with that? And the federal government has the authority to fight back does it not? Nobody disagrees with that statement? Sure. Professor.
▶ 1:39:30Prof. Donohue: I would say within constitutional limits, yes.
▶ 1:39:34Sen. Cornyn: Ok. Do any of you disagree with giving state and local law enforcement the authority to fight back?
▶ 1:39:46Prof. Donohue: Again, within constitutional limits.
▶ 1:39:50Sen. Kennedy: Ok. Tell me what your constitutional concerns are, professor.
▶ 1:39:57Prof. Donohue: I have three primary concerns. The first has to do with the fourth amendment and the conditions under which a warrant is required and a general warrant is forbidden by the fourth amendment. In this particular case --
▶ 1:40:10Sen. Kennedy: Before you give me one of your lectures, professor, are you saying that we should require state and local law enforcement to get a warrant before they fight back?
▶ 1:40:26Prof. Donohue: It depends on the condition. In an exigent circumstance.
▶ 1:40:31Sen. Kennedy: I'm aware of the exceptions to the warrant requirement. But generally speaking, you want to require them to get a warrant.
▶ 1:40:42Prof. Donohue: Only for the search of a device or the seizure of property. There are also due process implications of that.
▶ 1:40:48Sen. Kennedy: Ok. You started to mention another one of your objections.
▶ 1:40:54Prof. Donohue: First amendment.
▶ 1:40:55Sen. Kennedy: First amendment. Any others?
▶ 1:40:58Prof. Donohue: I also have a state rights and 10th amendment concern which is that states only airspace adjacent to the land within their state that is not federally owned and the current federal provisions don't recognize state sovereignty in that way.
▶ 1:41:12Sen. Kennedy: So, you want to give state and local law enforcement the authority to fight back, but you want --want to listing a lot of conditions, is that a fair assessment?
▶ 1:41:24Prof. Donohue: Not a lot, but some, there needs to be a nexus to the facility, it can't be any drone with any in america, right now it is too broad. There have to be acknowledgments of first amendment concerns. For instance, limiting the coverage facilities to the experience and logic test which the courts used for right of public access or prohibiting media bands across the board or removing city entitlement before and after special events so they don't extend extensively.
▶ 1:41:55Prof. Donohue: This is what a number of state measures already do. I would like to see that at a federal level and applied to bring this within constitutional.
▶ 1:42:02Sen. Kennedy: Sounds like a lot of conditions to me.
▶ 1:42:04Prof. Donohue: No, not very many as long as there is probable cause and the conditions are met than absolutely.
▶ 1:42:10Sen. Kennedy: Have you ever heard of a legislative practice called living a bill to death?
▶ 1:42:17Prof. Donohue: Yes.
▶ 1:42:18Sen. Kennedy: And that is when you take a bill and someone says, I'm really for this bill but then they add so many amendments and they screw it up so badly that the bill either becomes ineffective or doesn't pass. Is that a pretty accurate description?
▶ 1:42:39Prof. Donohue: Of the term?
▶ 1:42:43Prof. Donohue: Yes.
▶ 1:42:44Sen. Kennedy: You are trying to love this to death.
▶ 1:42:47Prof. Donohue: I disagree.
▶ 1:42:48Sen. Kennedy: You are not forgiving law enforcement the power to fight back.
▶ 1:42:52Prof. Donohue: I am in favor of giving law enforcement that power and respecting constitutional limits.
▶ 1:42:57Sen. Kennedy: I don't believe you, professor. You are not talking to bambi's baby brother here. I have read some of your stuff. I think you would be more intellectually honest if you came out and said, I'm on the side of the bad guys here. I think we shouldn't give state and local law enforcement the authority to fight back. You are trying to make it as hard as possible.
▶ 1:43:26Prof. Donohue: We will have to disagree on that point.
▶ 1:43:28Sen. Kennedy: You ever heard the expression watch what they do, not what they say? I'm watching what you've done. I know what you believe. You are on the fisa court?
▶ 1:43:45Prof. Donohue: I'm not one of the court, I'm an amicus for the court of appeal.
▶ 1:43:51Sen. Kennedy: Were you there when you guys issued all those bad warrants against trump's people?
▶ 1:43:57Prof. Donohue: I can't discuss my work on the court.
▶ 1:44:00Sen. Kennedy: It is top-secret, right. You would have to put me -- she would have to put the american people on double secret probation if you told the truth, wouldn't you?
▶ 1:44:10Prof. Donohue: No. I can't discuss my matters that I handled before the court. I can discuss the public ones where I have dealt with first amendment concerns and the right to petition. I did an extensive history.
▶ 1:44:22Sen. Kennedy: I'm done. >> thank you, senator kennedy. Senator blumenthal.
▶ 1:44:29Senator Blumenthal: Thanks, madam chair. You know, when there are sightings or reports of drones, the ones who respond are often the local and state police law enforcement as you know.
▶ 1:44:44Senator Blumenthal: Very often dhs or the department of justice take a lot longer to respond and the ones on the line of we have seen recently in connecticut, sightings, many of them and they often lack the resources really to provide adequate answers. Shouldn't we be providing more authority and resources to local and state law enforcement?
▶ 1:45:30Senator Blumenthal: The faa can barely provide air traffic safety, it is losing the skilled workforce to protect safety in the skies. Shouldn't we be giving more authority to state and local law enforcement along with the resources to do their job? I will ask all of you that question. And maybe be more specific about what specific equipment and how it should be provided.
▶ 1:46:02Senator Blumenthal: >> that is a question that our federal partners are allowed to do this. They have had more capabilities than us. It should be rules and regulations.
▶ 1:46:31Senator Blumenthal: I think that is how you move forward. It should be under certain guidelines and restrictions but they need certain levels of training, certification, etc. To make sure when they do detect something, they are making the right decision based on a multitude of different things. It should be done in that way. >> I agree as well, senator.
▶ 1:47:00Senator Blumenthal: I think it is also important that state and local authorities as well as airport owners and infrastructure owners are given the authority to use did -- advanced detection measures so there is a common understanding of threats before it becomes too late.
▶ 1:47:19Senator Blumenthal: There also should be an expansion of authority to train state and local authorities subject to oversight, subject to protections for civil rights and privacy that would allow a trained state and local authorities to engage in appropriate mitigation measures.
▶ 1:47:40Senator Blumenthal: Finally, there needs to be the ability for our domestic drone industry to test and innovate and be able to do the kind of testing to ensure that the federal government and state and locals have the best technology to engage in the kind of disruptions that don't require kinetic action as well.
▶ 1:48:02Sen. Blumenthal: Are you concerned about how robust the domestic drone industry is?
▶ 1:48:07Ms. Daskal: I think it is important to support the domestic drone industry and I think it is important to ensure that as entities within the domestic drone industry are seeking to engage in the testing , make sure the drone industry is ahead of the adversaries.
▶ 1:48:31Sen. Blumenthal: The overwhelming number of drones in this country are made abroad.
▶ 1:48:35Ms. Daskal: Yes, that is a concern.
▶ 1:48:37Sen. Blumenthal: In china.
▶ 1:48:39Ms. Daskal: That is a concern.
▶ 1:48:41Sen. Blumenthal: What is the percentage? I apologize for repeating.
▶ 1:48:45Prof. Donohue: If I may, 80% of the drones are dji, which is a chinese company.
▶ 1:48:54Sen. Blumenthal: 80%. What can be done to increase the number made in this country and thus restrict the number made in china? Mr. wilson?
▶ 1:49:05Mr. Wilson: I'm going to echo what my partner here has set already. Increase the funding for american drone manufacturers. To be competitive. In technology and price. They can do it.
▶ 1:49:29Sen. Blumenthal: With increased funding.
▶ 1:49:31Mr. Wilson: Yes, sir.
▶ 1:49:33Sen. Blumenthal: Thank. >> thank you, senator blumenthal. Senator blackburn.
▶ 1:49:40Senator Blumenthal: Thank you, madam chairman, and thank you all for being here. Each of us, when you look at dji, their numbers are of tremendous concern for us. That is why some of us have had provisions that remove the ability of our military to use dji drones and also for local law enforcement. From them using dji drones.
▶ 1:50:10Senator Blumenthal: Any of these drones that are manufactured by adversaries are in these adversarial situations are a safety risk to us because of the transmission of that data and then who holds that data and where they hold that data.
▶ 1:50:35Senator Blumenthal: As we continue to push back on utilization of foreign manufactured drones, it gives openings for the domestic industry to increase their presence. We hope Mr. wilson an answer or in addition to what you were saying, we hope that this helps to motivate domestic manufacturing of these drones. We do know there are supply chain issues around that.
▶ 1:51:05Senator Blumenthal: As we look at tariffs and trade, we are seeking to address some of those issues. I represent tennessee. We have a lot of outdoor events in tennessee. We have football that people enjoy with the titans, we have the bonner room music festival and so many festivals around our state.
▶ 1:51:32Senator Blumenthal: I have recently done the fish fry and the strawberry fest and a couple of others in our beautiful state. But one of the things people are concerned about is when they do here that drones are flying overhead. Because they don't know who put it there and why they put it there.
▶ 1:51:53Senator Blumenthal: And if this is an infringement on their privacy or if they are being spied upon and the first person they turned to is going to be local law enforcement. I agree with some of you and disagree with professor donohue.
▶ 1:52:18Senator Blumenthal: I think it is an imperative that we give local and state law enforcement the ability to participate in this policing and the mitigation efforts that need to take place. I would like and sergeant dooley, let me come to you on this.
▶ 1:52:39Senator Blumenthal: Let's break this down and look at what kind of partner the fbi and the faa have been for state and local law enforcement as you look at these mitigation efforts . What kind of partner are they when it comes to these counter uas efforts? And where could that relationship be strengthened?
▶ 1:53:06Mr. Dooley: Number one, the relationship, the stakeholder relationship we have with both of those entities is pretty strong. The faa is super supportive and unfortunately they can't grant those provisions to do those things. Even some of the data some of our federal partners collect sometimes they worried about how it was collected, etc., but it can be strengthened by again starting the process of establishing one of those federal entities as the lead to help guide people forward.
▶ 1:53:37Mr. Dooley: And then from there, I think it will blossom and organically grow into something stronger where there is regulation and now we have a pathway forward and people can start learning how to do this. I'm a strong believer you shouldn't just understand the technology itself, you should have a firm grasp on everything that goes into it including faa regulations, etc.
▶ 1:53:57Mr. Dooley: So that when you have one of those events in tennessee, someone had a legal right to be there, fair and equitable access to that airspace, they have proper permissions and they are just documenting or taking photos or whatever it is it doesn't mean we shouldn't know that that is something benign versus something that is bad.
▶ 1:54:15Sen. Blackburn: So, basically a preclearance to be in that space.
▶ 1:54:20Mr. Dooley: Yes.
▶ 1:54:22Sen. Blackburn: I want to move onto something Mr. dixon talked about earlier and sergeant dooley, I will stay with you. We have had two instances in tennessee where a criminal attempted to use an armed drone to murder someone.
▶ 1:54:40Sen. Blackburn: In one case, there was somebody planning an attack on the knoxville fbi field office and in another, a man attempted to attack an electronic substation with homemade drones. So, we know that this takes place. Mr. dixon talked about it with law enforcement in prisons and jails.
▶ 1:55:04Sen. Blackburn: So, it just leads me to believe that there has got to be some reforms. On how we look at the regulations around the drones. I know I'm over time. Madam chair, if I may take a moment.
▶ 1:55:25Sen. Blackburn: Sergeant dooley, let me have you talk a bit, how we do these reforms before there is a successful attack that is carried out, how would we go about those reforms for any type of attack that takes place?
▶ 1:55:44Mr. Dooley: Again, we have three handsome public safety professionals. We have our senators, our decision-makers and we have some legal experts. There is a path for -- pathway forward, it can be quick and done correctly. I'm a firm believer we have to establish someone who is the lead and from there, I think we can move forward to get it done pretty quickly.
▶ 1:56:09Mr. Dooley: And then all of our states represented here, florida and texas, it would step up to whatever level we need.
▶ 1:56:18Sen. Blackburn: Secretary dixon, anything to add?
▶ 1:56:21Mr. Dixon: I agree, the first thing is the technology exists. That is good news and bad news, the question is the authority. I would distinguish ourselves a little bit independently in the correction and -- correction industry because we are a fixed site and have a specific population. I don't think there is any restriction to move forward to combat this immediately.
▶ 1:56:46Sen. Blackburn: The federal and state and local partnership, we need to work through that?
▶ 1:56:50Mr. Dixon: The partnership is great. We need language, authority on the federal level to allow us to utilize the tools. >> thank you, senator blackburn, and think you do all of our witnesses for being here today. I know this was a long hearing but I appreciate your attention and participation throughout. Written questions can be submitted by senators for the record until may 27 at 5:00 p.m.
▶ 1:57:16Mr. Dixon: And then we will ask the witnesses to respond and return the questions to the committee as quickly as possible. With that, you are free to go and enjoy lunch. The hearing is adjourned. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap.org]