HR6042-119

In Committee

LANDED Act

119th Congress Introduced Nov 12, 2025

Summary

What This Bill Does

The LANDED Act defines covered counter-UAS systems and threats posed by unmanned aircraft systems, then directs the Secretary of Homeland Security, in coordination with the Attorney General and FAA Administrator, to establish policies, procedures, protocols, and an application process allowing each State law enforcement agency to acquire, deploy, operate, and train with approved counter-UAS mitigation systems. DHS-approved agreements must specify the equipment, threat-response authority, dates and circumstances of use, safety terms, site visits, and post-event reporting. Approved State agencies may authorize personnel to detect, identify, monitor, track, or mitigate credible UAS threats notwithstanding specified aviation, computer-crime, wiretap, and radio-interference laws. FAA must consider FCC criteria for avoiding disruption to civilian communications and information technology networks. DHS and FAA must also create a mandatory nonemergency deconfliction reporting system with a database of transponder IDs and dates and times for government drones in use. DHS may rapidly respond to State emergency requests. The bill creates a Counter-UAS Security Grant Program for State law enforcement and emergency management agencies to acquire approved equipment, pay training fees, and carry out related administrative activities, with funds available for at least 24 months. Finally, the DOD Inspector General must report within 90 days on potential foreign-adversary-connected UAS activity over military installations, vessels, aircraft, sensitive national security sites, law enforcement assets, and the homeland, including information-sharing and deployment processes.

Who Benefits and How

State law enforcement agencies benefit because they can seek DHS authorization to acquire, deploy, operate, and train with approved counter-UAS mitigation systems. Local law enforcement agencies benefit when State agencies delegate approved counter-UAS authority for protection of people, facilities, or assets. Counter-UAS equipment manufacturers and training providers benefit from the new authorization framework and security grant program. Emergency management agencies benefit because they are eligible for grants to acquire counter-UAS equipment and training. Critical infrastructure operators, military installations, and public-safety sites benefit from a formal process for mitigating unauthorized drone threats. Congress benefits from a DOD Inspector General review of foreign-adversary-connected drone activity and executive-branch information sharing.

Who Bears the Burden and How

DHS, DOJ, FAA, FCC, and CBP officials must create application procedures, performance requirements, safety terms, communications-interference criteria, agreements, site visits, and reporting rules. State and local law enforcement agencies operating counter-UAS systems must comply with approved deployment windows, post-event reporting, deconfliction checks, and training requirements. Commercial and recreational drone operators face increased risk of detection, monitoring, disruption, or mitigation when flights are treated as credible threats. Government agencies operating drones must report nonemergency drone operations into the deconfliction database and check transponder status. DOD Inspector General staff must complete a rapid 90-day review of UAS activity over military, national security, and homeland sites. Civilian communications and information-technology networks require safeguards against counter-UAS radio-frequency or cellular-network interference.

Key Provisions

  • Defines approved counter-UAS systems and threats posed by unmanned aircraft systems.
  • Requires DHS, DOJ, and FAA to establish policies and an application process for State law enforcement counter-UAS mitigation authority.
  • Authorizes approved State agencies to detect, monitor, track, and mitigate credible drone threats notwithstanding specified federal statutes.
  • Requires FAA to consider FCC criteria for avoiding disruption to civilian communications and information technology networks.
  • Requires mandatory nonemergency drone deconfliction reporting for federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies.
  • Authorizes rapid DHS response to State emergency requests for UAS mitigation assistance.
  • Establishes a Counter-UAS Security Grant Program for State law enforcement and emergency management agencies.
  • Requires a DOD Inspector General report on foreign-adversary-connected UAS activity and information sharing.

Evidence Chain:

This summary is generated from the full bill text using AI analysis. Expand "Detailed Analysis" below for identified beneficiaries/burden bearers with clause-level evidence links.

At a Glance

What This Bill Does

Creates a counter-UAS law-enforcement cooperation framework by authorizing State law enforcement agencies, under DHS agreements coordinated with DOJ and FAA, to acquire and operate approved counter-drone mitigation systems; requiring drone deconfliction reporting; allowing rapid DHS emergency response; creating a counter-UAS security grant program; and requiring a DOD Inspector General review of foreign-adversary-connected UAS activity.

Key Policy Areas

Counter-UAS, Homeland Security, Law Enforcement, Aviation

Primary Purpose

Creates a counter-UAS law-enforcement cooperation framework by authorizing State law enforcement agencies, under DHS agreements coordinated with DOJ and FAA, to acquire and operate approved counter-drone mitigation systems; requiring drone deconfliction reporting; allowing rapid DHS emergency response; creating a counter-UAS security grant program; and requiring a DOD Inspector General review of foreign-adversary-connected UAS activity.

Policy Domains

Counter-UAS Homeland Security Law Enforcement Aviation

Substantive provisions

Identified Gains
  • State law enforcement agencies
  • Local law enforcement agencies
  • Counter-UAS equipment manufacturers
  • Counter-UAS training providers
  • Emergency management agencies
  • Critical infrastructure operators
  • Military installations
  • Congressional oversight committees
Model: codex-gpt-5 | Version: bill_summary_v2 | Source: ih
Military installations: , , , , ,
Emergency management agencies: , , , , ,
Counter-UAS training providers: , , , , ,
Local law enforcement agencies: , , , , ,
State law enforcement agencies: , , , , ,
Critical infrastructure operators: , , , , ,
Congressional oversight committees: , , , , ,
Counter-UAS equipment manufacturers: , , , , ,
Identified Costs
  • Department of Homeland Security
  • Department of Justice
  • Federal Aviation Administration
  • Federal Communications Commission
  • State and local law enforcement operators
  • Commercial drone operators
  • Recreational drone operators
  • Government drone fleet managers
  • DOD Inspector General staff
Model: codex-gpt-5 | Version: bill_summary_v2 | Source: ih
Department of Justice: , , , , ,
Commercial drone operators: , , , , ,
DOD Inspector General staff: , , , , ,
Recreational drone operators: , , , , ,
Department of Homeland Security: , , , , ,
Federal Aviation Administration: , , , , ,
Government drone fleet managers: , , , , ,
Federal Communications Commission: , , , , ,
State and local law enforcement operators: , , , , ,

Legislative Progress

In Committee
Introduced Committee Passed
Nov 13, 2025

Referred to the Subcommittee on Aviation.

Nov 13, 2025

Referred to the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence.

Nov 13, 2025

Referred to the Subcommittee on Transportation and Maritime Security.

Nov 12, 2025

Mr. Smith of New Jersey introduced the following bill; which …

Nov 12, 2025

Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition …

Nov 12, 2025

Introduced in House

Stakeholder Effects

cui bono?

How this legislation distributes effects. Mention counts reflect frequency, not effect magnitude.

Government
4 mentions across 3 clauses
+2 positive -2 negative

Department of Defense Inspector General, Department of Homeland Security, State governments facing drone emergencies

Department of Homeland Security faces effects in multiple directions

Positive-direction: State governments facing drone emergencies

Negative-direction: Department of Defense Inspector General

Defense
3 mentions across 3 clauses
+2 positive ?1 uncertain

Counter-UAS equipment manufacturers and training providers, Counter-UAS technology manufacturers, Counter-UAS technology manufacturers and vendors

Transportation
2 mentions across 2 clauses
-2 negative

Commercial and recreational drone operators

Technology
1 mention across 1 clause
+1 positive

Government drone fleet management systems providers

6/7
sections analyzed
Full impact breakdown

Bill Structure & Actor Mappings

Who is "The Secretary" in each section?

Domains
Counter-UAS Homeland Security Law Enforcement Aviation

We use a combination of our own taxonomy and classification in addition to large language models to assess meaning and potential beneficiaries. High confidence means strong textual evidence. Always verify with the original bill text.

Learn more about our methodology