PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 23, 2013
Drones Accountability Act - Prohibits the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) from operating or controlling armed unmanned aerial vehicles (drones) or combat aircraft.
Prohibit any member of the U.S. Armed Forces and any other employee or contractor of the Department of Defense (DOD) from carrying out an order or authorization from any CIA employee or contractor to use lethal force.
Requires the Department of Defense (DOD) to report to Congress on: (1) the existence and sufficiency of civilian protection mechanisms in accordance with international law concerning armed operations that use unmanned aerial operations; (2) the methodology used to distinguish combatants from civilians before armed operations and after a strike has occurred; (3) the existence and sufficiency of standards for the identification of targets and the sufficiency of intelligence sources and analysis where there is limited U.S. ground presence; and (4) the existence and sufficiency of processes for recognizing the effects of drone strikes on the organization being targeted and on the country or region in which the strike takes place.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the DOD, Department of Justice (DOJ), and CIA, once every three months, to provide Congress with all legal opinions giving advice with regard the authority to use lethal force in order to justify operations.
Expresses the sense of Congress that a moratorium must be enforced against the lethal use of armed unmanned aerial vehicles until the Administration has presented, and Congress has approved, sufficient safeguards and sufficient oversight addressing the concerns highlighted in the report required by this Act.
Bars, until such safeguards are in place, the obligation or expenditure of any funding available for the Armed Forces or the CIA for the purpose of using lethal force against an individual unless: (1) that individual presents an imminent threat to the United States, (2) lethal force is the last resort, and (3) the harm caused to civilians or civilian property is proportional and does not violate international humanitarian law.
People & committees
Rep. Lee, Barbara [D-CA-13] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committees on Intelligence (Permanent Select), and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committees on Intelligence (Permanent Select), and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committees on Intelligence (Permanent Select), and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.2183 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.2183 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.2183 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.2183 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.