Constitutional attorney Kris Anne Hall said that if these are government drones, they are violating our private property rights!
She wrote the following on X and linked to a Fox News article citing a former CIA officer saying the drones could be tied to a classified exercise:
IF THESE ARE GOVERNMENT DRONES THEN OUR PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE BEING VIOLATED…
The airspace directly above private property, specifically below 500 feet (and 400 feet in Florida), should be recognized as part of an individual’s personal domain, deserving an expectation of privacy. This argument stems from both property rights and privacy concerns in a modern context.
Historically, property ownership extended “from the heavens to the center of the earth,” granting landowners control of the airspace above their land. While the advent of aviation and federal regulations curtailed this notion, the principle remains relevant at low altitudes. Airspace below the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) designated navigable airspace—500 feet generally, 400 feet for drones—should be treated as an extension of the property. This is where the owner engages in personal, private activities, such as enjoying a backyard, growing a garden, or maintaining a pool, free from public scrutiny.
The Supreme Court has affirmed the principle of a “reasonable expectation of privacy” in cases like Katz v. United States (1967), emphasizing that privacy is context-dependent. For landowners, activities within their immediate airspace meet this standard. Intrusions at these low altitudes, whether by drones, helicopters, or other devices, directly interfere with a homeowner’s solitude, akin to trespassing on the ground.
Recognizing airspace below 500 feet as personal property preserves both privacy and property rights, ensuring that individuals can enjoy their land without unwarranted observation. In an era of rapid technological advancement, maintaining these protections is vital to safeguarding personal Liberty. Finally, since the Supreme Court has recognized the right to privacy as being contextual, I truly believe an argument to expand privacy rights can be legitimately and legally made. With the advent of highly sophisticated surveillance technology, one could legitimately argue the invasion of privacy at a greater distance.
(c) Liberty First Legal, Inc 2024
Follow her here
Subscribe to the Daily Newsletter
wpDiscuz
