Proposal to Limit Warrantless Drone Surveillance is Back

California lawmakers are again asking Gov. Jerry Brown to require law enforcement to obtain a warrant to use drones. Last September, Brown vetoed a bill that would have required a warrant for drones, and a simialr bill could end up before him soon.

AB 37, introduced by Nora Campos (D-San Jose), on Dec. 1 is pretty much a repeat of AB 1327, which passed the Assembly and Senate earlier this year before Brown torpedoed it.

In his brief veto note, Brown wrote, "There are undoubtedly circumstances where a warrant is appropriate. The bill's exceptions, however, appear to be too narrow and could impose requirements beyond what is required by either the 4th Amendment or the privacy provisions in the California Constitution."

The new bill applies to all public agencies, not just law enforcement, and calls for images and other information gathered by drones to be destroyed after one year. It would also grant a number of exceptions in which a warrant is not needed, including hostage situations, hot pursuits, search and rescue missions, inspecting state parks for illegal vegetation or fires, environmental emergencies, and academic research or teaching.

The California State Sheriffs' Association opposed the last bill of this kind, and is "likely to oppose" AB 37, said spokesman Aaron Maguire. "If someone's in a public place where they do not have expectations of privacy we don't believe you should have to get a warrant to photograph someone," he said. Maguire said that a warrant might be required if police wanted to use an infrared camera to record someone inside their home, but should not be required to photograph people in public.

The LAPD obtained two Draganflyer drones from the Seattle Police Department last May. The department will not use them, though, until it has clear guidelines from the federal and state governments and has heard public input, said department spokesman Officer Jack Richter.

"We're waiting to find out what our parameters are," he said. "It's such a new technology that everyone's really unsure of where to proceed. We are going to stay on the side of caution."

Some Angelenos, such as Hamid Khan of the Stop LAPD Spying Coalition, oppose the LAPD using drones, with or without a warrant.

"The LAPD is one of the most hyper-militarized surveillance apparatuses we have in the country," he said. Khan believes the LAPD has a history of mission creep. "The objective gets broadened over time and the next thing you know it becomes a daily policing practice," he said. He cited SWAT teams an example, saying that today they are used for many more purposes -- such as drug searches -- than originally intended for, like hostage and active shooter situations.

AB 37 is joined this session by another drone bill, AB 14, which would cover public and private drone use. AB 14, introduced by Marie Waldron (R-Escondido), would create a task force and give it two years to craft a comprehensive drone policy that "protects privacy and allows for the use of unmanned aircraft for public and private applications."