Bill Description: House Bill 522 would criminalize flying a drone near a correctional facility, even unknowingly.
Rating: -1
NOTE: House Bill 522 is similar to (and likely a replacement for) House Bill 499 (2026).
Does it directly or indirectly create or increase penalties for victimless crimes or non-restorative penalties for non-violent crimes? Conversely, does it eliminate or decrease penalties for victimless crimes or non-restorative penalties for non-violent crimes?
House Bill 522 would create Section 20-251, Idaho Code, to declare “the airspace from the surface to a height of four hundred (400) feet above ground level within the defined perimeter of a correctional facility” as “restricted airspace” in which unmanned aircraft systems (drones) may not fly.
The bill would also give the Department of Correction and law enforcement officers authority to detect, track, identify, intercept, disable, and capture drones “operating in a nefarious manner within restricted airspace within this state.”
Unlike House Bill 499, which defined “proximity” as “within two (2) nautical miles from the farthest defined perimeter of a correctional facility,” House Bill 522 does not include the word “proximity,” relying instead on the phrase “defined perimeter,” which it paradoxically, does not define.
The bill would criminalize “the use of an unmanned aircraft system within the restricted airspace of a correctional facility” and impose a mandatory minimum penalty of a $2,000 fine for violations, with a maximum penalty of a $5,000 fine and one year of incarceration. The bill also says, “the court shall order the forfeiture of the unmanned aircraft system used in connection with the unlawful act.”
As with House Bill 499, House Bill 522 takes the extraordinary step of removing the requirement that the offense be committed knowingly, saying instead, “Lack of knowledge that the prohibited act occurred within the restricted airspace of the correctional facility shall not be a defense.”
It should also be noted here that while the authority to intercept and capture drones is tied to their being operated in a “nefarious manner,” no similar limitation applies to the criminalization or penalty.
Rather than limit its prohibition to the intentional commission of a nefarious act, this bill would criminalize the unintentional, non-nefarious use of a drone within the ironically undefined “defined perimeter of a correctional facility.”
(-1)
