S1809-119

What This Bill Does

S.1809, the Drone Espionage Act, inserts video after photographic negative wherever that phrase appears in 18 U.S.C. 793. The current statute contains those lists in subsections (b) through (f), addressing specified acquisition, receipt, communication, retention and negligent handling of national-defense material. The bill makes the medium explicit within those existing offenses. Despite its title, its operative language is not restricted to drones: qualifying video recorded or handled by other means is also covered.

The introduced and Senate-reported texts contain the same substantive amendment. The bill remains pending on the Senate calendar following its February 9, 2026 reporting. It does not establish a separate drone licensing system, flight restriction, equipment ban or stand-alone offense of filming any military property.

Who Benefits and How

Defense agencies and personnel whose sensitive national-defense information is recorded on video could benefit from clearer statutory coverage. Federal investigators and prosecutors would have an express reference to video when pursuing conduct that satisfies the relevant existing offense. The amendment may reduce arguments based only on the recording medium, but existing references to information and other materials mean it would be misleading to say video-based espionage is categorically lawful today.

The change can support protection against acquisition or disclosure of defense information. It neither guarantees fewer espionage incidents nor creates a financial award, procurement preference or subsidy for drone manufacturers or security vendors.

Who Bears the Burden and How

People acquiring, receiving, communicating, retaining or handling covered video would be expressly subject to the relevant statutory elements. Those elements differ by subsection. Subsection (b) incorporates the national-defense purpose and intent-or-reason-to-believe standard; (c) addresses knowing or reason-to-believe receipt of material obtained contrary to the chapter. Subsections (d) and (e) address willful unauthorized communication or retention under their respective possession and return requirements. Subsection (f) covers grossly negligent handling or specified failures to report known loss or removal by entrusted or lawful custodians. Ordinary inadvertence is not automatically the same as gross negligence, and the bill does not remove any of these elements.

Existing section 793 penalties include a fine, imprisonment for up to ten years, or both, with conspiracy and specified proceeds-forfeiture provisions. The bill does not increase those penalties, create a mandatory prison minimum, or make every recording of a defense-related location a crime. It also does not make classification markings the sole statutory test. Whether a particular recording or disclosure satisfies the law would depend on the facts and applicable legal standards. Agencies and custodians may need to clarify their handling guidance, but no new reporting program, appropriation or staffing mandate is imposed.

Key Provisions

• Expands the enumerated media in section 793(b)-(f) by expressly adding video.
• Uses the existing offense-specific mental-state, possession, disclosure and handling requirements, rather than prohibiting all drone photography.
• Uses existing penalties and applies the media clarification regardless of the device used to record video.