Long posts

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.