S1250-119

In Committee

SHIELD U Act

119th Congress Introduced Apr 2, 2025

Analysis under review: This bill has generated analysis that may be too generic or incomplete. Clause-level evidence remains available below.

Summary

The SHIELD U Act (Stopping Harmful Incidents to Enforce Lawful Drone Use Act) creates a comprehensive legal framework for detecting and neutralizing threatening drones at airports and in communities. It authorizes DHS, state/local law enforcement, and airport police to conduct counter-drone operations at commercial service airports with airport operator consent. Off-airport, state and local law enforcement can take counter-drone actions within their jurisdictions, including establishing testing areas. The bill authorizes federal departments (DOD, DHS, DOJ, DOE) to contract with private companies for counter-drone technology and services. It mandates counter-UAS training curricula through the Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers. Airports can use Airport Improvement Program funds to purchase counter-drone equipment, and must develop tactical response plans within two years. The bill also amends the Communications Act to permit limited use of jamming technology against drones, with FCC notification requirements.

Evidence Chain:

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

At a Glance

What This Bill Does

Authorizes Counter-UAS (unmanned aircraft system) activities at commercial service airports and off-airport by state and local law enforcement, establishes procurement and training frameworks, authorizes contracts for federal counter-drone programs, and amends the Communications Act to allow limited jamming technology use against threatening drones.

Who Benefits

  • Counter-drone technology companies (new procurement market)
  • Commercial airports (security equipment and AIP funding)
  • State and local law enforcement (new authorities and training)

Who Bears Costs

  • Commercial drone operators (risk of disruption or destruction)
  • FCC and NTIA (new consultation and notification duties)
  • Airport operators (tactical response plan development)

Key Policy Areas

{'domain': 'Transportation', 'evidence': 'Focuses on commercial service airport security from drone threats'}, {'domain': 'Defense', 'evidence': 'Authorizes DOD counter-UAS contracts and extends military counter-drone authorities'}, {'domain': 'Homeland Security', 'evidence': 'DHS authorized for counter-UAS activities; training through FLETC'}, {'domain': 'Telecommunications', 'evidence': 'Amends Communications Act Section 301 to allow jamming equipment against drones'}

Primary Purpose

Authorizes Counter-UAS (unmanned aircraft system) activities at commercial service airports and off-airport by state and local law enforcement, establishes procurement and training frameworks, authorizes contracts for federal counter-drone programs, and amends the Communications Act to allow limited jamming technology use against threatening drones.

Policy Domains

{'domain': 'Transportation', 'evidence': 'Focuses on commercial service airport security from drone threats'} {'domain': 'Defense', 'evidence': 'Authorizes DOD counter-UAS contracts and extends military counter-drone authorities'} {'domain': 'Homeland Security', 'evidence': 'DHS authorized for counter-UAS activities; training through FLETC'} {'domain': 'Telecommunications', 'evidence': 'Amends Communications Act Section 301 to allow jamming equipment against drones'}

Legislative Strategy

"Create comprehensive legal authority for counter-drone operations that currently exist in a legal gray area, allowing local law enforcement to act without waiting for federal response"

Legislative Progress

In Committee
Introduced Committee Passed
Apr 2, 2025

Mr. Lee introduced the following bill; which was read twice …

Apr 2, 2025

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, …

Apr 2, 2025

Introduced in Senate

Stakeholder Effects

cui bono?

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

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

FCC, Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers, Law enforcement officers

Positive-direction: Law enforcement officers, State and local law enforcement

Negative-direction: FCC, Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers

Defense
5 mentions across 4 clauses
+5 positive

Authorized counter-UAS operators, Counter-drone technology companies, Defense and security contractors

Unmanned Aircraft Systems
2 mentions across 2 clauses
-2 negative

Commercial drone operators

Air Transport
1 mention across 1 clause
~1 mixed

Commercial service airports

Telecommunications
1 mention across 1 clause
-1 negative

Telecommunications providers

Critical Infrastructure
1 mention across 1 clause
+1 positive

Critical infrastructure operators

6/8
sections analyzed
Full impact breakdown

Bill Structure & Actor Mappings

Who is "The Secretary" in each section?

Domains
Transportation Homeland Security
Actor Mappings
"airport_operator"
→ Commercial service airport operator
"secretary_of_homeland_security"
→ Secretary of Homeland Security
Domains
Homeland Security
Actor Mappings
"state_local_law_enforcement"
→ State and local law enforcement agencies
Domains
Defense Telecommunications
Actor Mappings
"faa_administrator"
→ FAA Administrator
"tsa_administrator"
→ TSA Administrator

Key Definitions

Terms defined in this bill

4 terms
"commercial service airport" §2(1)

As defined in 49 USC 47102(7), including navigable airspace for safe takeoff and landing

"Counter-UAS activities" §2(3)

Detecting, identifying, monitoring, tracking, warning, disrupting, seizing, or destroying unmanned aircraft or UAS

"non-kinetic equipment" §2(5)

Equipment used to intercept or access communications controlling a UAS, or to disrupt UAS control

"threats posed by an unmanned aircraft" §2(6)

Unauthorized UAS activity reasonably believed to create potential for bodily harm, loss of life, or severe economic damage

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