Many possible, untested local laws over drone use
while the “navigable airspace” extends to the ground, that does not mean that States
are powerless to regulate UAS operations if they are not acting to regulate aviation safety or
airspace efficiency. It is well established in the context of manned aircraft that Federal law
does not preempt altogether any state regulation purporting to reach into the navigable
airspace; the same is true with respect to UAS.
...
For example, a privacy-related ban on UAS operations over an entire city would very
likely be preempted because it would completely prohibit UAS from using or
traversing the airspace above the city and impede the FAA’s and Congress’s ability to
safely and effectively integrate UAS into the national airspace.7 In contrast, a
privacy-related restriction applied to the lower altitudes over facilities where people
could likely have an expectation of privacy—such as parks or schools—would more
likely be permissible because of its lesser impact. Similarly, tailored security-related
restrictions over open-air water treatment facilities or certain types of critical
infrastructure would more likely be permissible where the restrictions were limited to
the lower altitudes and still permitted UAS overflight (e.g., by commercial package
delivery UAS) at higher altitudes.8
...
(allowable) laws could include those concerning land use or zoning; harassment of
individuals or groups; privacy; voyeurism; trespass on property; the exercise of other
police powers; reckless endangerment; emergency medical services; search and
rescue; law enforcement use of facial recognition; delivery of prison contraband;
wildfire suppression;10 criminal mischief;
...
Laws that prohibit, restrict, or sanction operations by UAS in the immediate reaches of
property to the extent that such operations substantially interfere with the property owner’s
actual use and enjoyment of the property.…
Read on Longpo.st