```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 972 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 972

    To protect individual privacy against unwarranted governmental 
  intrusion through the use of the unmanned aerial vehicles commonly 
                 called drones, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 5, 2013

 Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia introduced the following bill; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To protect individual privacy against unwarranted governmental 
  intrusion through the use of the unmanned aerial vehicles commonly 
                 called drones, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Preserving Freedom from Unwarranted 
Surveillance Act of 2013''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITED USE OF DRONES.

    Except as provided in section 3, a person or entity acting under 
the authority of the United States shall not use a drone to gather 
evidence or other information pertaining to criminal conduct or conduct 
in violation of a regulation except to the extent authorized in a 
warrant issued under the procedures described in the Federal Rules of 
Criminal Procedure.

SEC. 3. EXCEPTIONS.

    This Act does not prohibit any of the following:
            (1) Patrol of borders.--The use of a drone to patrol 
        national borders to prevent or deter illegal entry of any 
        immigrants or illegal substances.
            (2) Exigent circumstances.--The use of a drone by a law 
        enforcement party when exigent circumstances exist. For the 
        purposes of this paragraph, exigent circumstances exist when 
        the law enforcement party possesses reasonable suspicion that 
        under particular circumstances, swift action to prevent 
        imminent danger to life or serious damage to property, or to 
        forestall the imminent escape of a suspect, or destruction of 
        evidence.
            (3) High risk.--The use of a drone to counter a high risk 
        of a terrorist attack by a specific individual or organization, 
        when the Secretary of Homeland Security determines credible 
        intelligence indicates there is such a risk.

SEC. 4. REMEDIES FOR VIOLATION.

    Any aggrieved party may in a civil action obtain all appropriate 
relief to prevent or remedy a violation of this Act.

SEC. 5. DEFINITIONS.

    In this Act:
            (1) The term ``drone'' means any powered, aerial vehicle 
        that does not carry a human operator, uses aerodynamic forces 
        to provide vehicle lift, can fly autonomously or be piloted 
        remotely, can be expendable or recoverable, and can carry a 
        lethal or nonlethal payload.
            (2) The term ``law enforcement party'' means a person or 
        entity authorized by law to investigate or prosecute offenses 
        against the United States.
                                 <all>
```